Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26188 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4344 of 2025 Petitioner :- Julfekar Ahmad Respondent :- Registrar, Firms, Society And Chits, Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Panna Lal Gupta,Amit Kumar,Shiv Prasad Chaurasia,Subrat Gupta Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice on behalf of the respondents no.1, 2 and 3 has been accepted by the office of the Chief Standing Counsel. 2. Shri Haider Abbas, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the respondent no.4, the same is taken on record. 3. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs:- (i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the election of Committee of Management of the Madarsa held on 24.07.2024 organized by the opposite party no.3 whereby attested the signature of opposite party no.5 on 09.09.2024 as Manager of Madarsa Jamiya Arbiya Izharul Uloom Naya Bazar, Jahangirganj, Ambedkar Nagar as contained in annexure no.1 to this writ petition. (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite party no.2 to hol the fresh election of Committee of Management, Madarsa Jamiya Arbiya Izharul Uloom Naya Bazar, Jahangirganj, Ambedkar Nagar considering the membership of petitioner and other 32 valid members total 100 members of General body of Madarsa in presence of competent authority/Observer according to law. (iii) issue a writ, order or direction in any nature which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. 4. A preliminary objection has been raised by the respondents that the election of the committee was held on 24.07.2024 and the term is of one year. The petitioner has not challenged the election and he has come forward in the writ petition whereas the petitioner has a statutory remedy under section 25 of the Society Registration Act, 1860 as amended in the State of U.P. Thus, for the said reason, the petition is not maintainable. 5. In response, the counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a valid member, however, ignoring his membership, the election has been held and the petitioner has a right to assail any such election where the bonafide members have not permitted to participate. However, the learned counsel for the petitionerhe could not dispute the fact that the election of the Society in pursuance whereof a valid constituted committee was elected on 24.07.2024 and the petitioner has a statutory remedy before the Prescribed Authority/Deputy Registrar as the case may be wherein the election dispute can be agitated. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a letter which has been brought on record as annexure no.13 dated 09.01.2024 and it is sought to be argued that this indicates that there was a valid membership dispute in the Society. However, he could not dispute the fact that the said letter was dated 09.01.2024 and the election has been held thereafter on 24.07.2024. 7. Learned Standing Counsel has also pointed out that another aggrieved member of the same Society had initially challenged the election by Writ-C No.2324 of 2025 (Javed Akhtar Vs. Registrar Firms Society and Chits Lucknow, U.P. and 4 others) wherein the Court had dismissed the petition on 10.04.2025 and thereafter another members of the same Society has filed the instant petition and this also dis-entitles the petitioner from claiming any relief. 8. In this regard, suffice to state that whether the election was challenged or not in the earlier writ filed by a different member is a subject matter which has been considered and decided in the earlier petition wherein the petitioner therein challenged a consequential order of attestation of signature and he also sought cancellation of the election incidentally. 9. The record indicates that in the earlier petition filed by the Javed Akhtar, there was a direct challenge to the order of attestation which has been challenged in this petition as well but the fact remains that neither Javed Akhtar nor the present petitioner has invoked the statutory remedy of assailing the election as provided under the Act. 10. Since the elections are to be challenged in terms of the Act of 1860, this Court is not inclined to entertain the petition at the behest of the petitioner, accordingly the petition is dismissed leaving it open for the petitioner to raise his grievance before the appropriate forum. Order Date :- 6.5.2025 ank Digitally signed by :- ALI NEWAZ KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench