HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 9883 of 2025 Court No. - 17 HON'BLE SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J. 1. Heard Sri Anadi Chitranshi, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Sandeep Srivastava, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel. 2. By means of the instant writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged validity of an order dated 20.09.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Lucknow Division, Lucknow whereby the list of members of general body of Society Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Samiti for the year 2018-19 submitted on 23.01.2019 and the list of members of general body of the society for the year 2022-23 submitted on 06.04.2022 have been rejected on the ground of concealment of fact and misstatement of fact. The opposite party no. 3 has been directed to conduct elections of the managing committee of the society and submit its list. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the aforesaid order has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. 4. A perusal of the order indicates that earlier the matter had been decided by the Deputy Registrar by means of an order dated 15.01.2025, which was set aside by means of an order dated 20.02.2025 passed by this Court in Writ C No. 1677/2025. It is recorded in the impugned order that by means of a letter dated 24.04.2025, the petitioner no. 2 was directed to submit the original documents relating to the society within 15 days. On 07.05.2025, the opposite party no. 3 submitted an application requesting for registration of the list of members of general body and managing committee of the society but they did not submit any evidence or Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anadi Chitranshi Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Ashutosh Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalay Samiti Thru.Manager Devdhari Verma And Another .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Prin. Secy. Institutional Finance Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) documents. 5. On 16.05.2025, the petitioner no. 2 gave an application requesting that he had filed an appeal before the Commissioner and no proceeding should be taken till decision of the appeal. The matter was heard and order was reserved on 14.08.2025. It is recorded in the impugned order that on 21.06.2025, the petitioner no. 2 has submitted photocopies of a list of members of the general body, receipt book, membership register, 3 pages of agenda register, 10 pages of minute book but he did not submit any document in original. The photocopies contained particulars recorded in the months of March and April regarding which no justification has been given. Per contra, the opposite party no. 3 submitted original documents including minute book relating to the year 1984 to 2000, 2000 to 2005, 2005 to 20.03.2023, 18.03.2024 to 06.03.2025, information register relating to the years 1993 to 2004, 2005 to 05.09.2023, information/ agenda register for the period 04.03.2024 to 06.04.2025, membership register for the year 1988-89 to 2001-02, 2002-03 to 2008-09, 2009-10 to 2025-26, income and expenditure register for the years 2009-10 to 2023- 24, membership fee receipt book for the period 2007 to April, 2025. The Deputy Registrar has recorded that the documents submitted by the opposite party no. 3 relate to the entire period since establishment of the society and has accepted the same and has directed him to conduct election of the society. 6. A bare perusal of the aforesaid order indicates that the order has been passed after taking into consideration the material submitted before the Deputy Registrar and there is no perversity or illegality in the order. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has tried to raise disputed questions of fact regarding correctness of the claim put-forth by the opposite party no. 3 which questions cannot be decided by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. In absence of any illegality or perversity in the order dated 20.09.2025 passed by the Deputy Registrar, there is no good ground to interfere in the said order in exercise of discretionary writ jurisdiction of this Court. 8. The writ petition lacks merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. October 15, 2025 Pradeep/- WRIC No. 9883 of 2025 2 (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench