Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:28660 Court No. - 32 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 39792 of 2023 Petitioner :- C/M Shri Vaishnav Harihar Vidhya Sabha Sherpur Kuti And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Gautam Baghel Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Om Prakash Singh,Prabhakar Awasthi Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J. 1.Heard Sri Gautam Baghel, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioners by means of the present writ petition have prayed for following relief: "(I) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the impugned orders dated 26.05.2023 (Annex No.5 Page Nos. 46-61) passed by the respondent no.2 vide which the committee of management has been declared time barred as well as the order dated 17.07.2023 vide which exercise of power under Section 25(2) the respondent no.2 has determined the electoral college as well as the election proceedings dated 25.09.2023. (II) Issue a writ, order, or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondent no.2 from registering the managing body under Section 4(1) of the Society Registration Act, 1860)" 3. A preliminary objection has been raised by learned counsel for the respondents that against the orders impugned, petitioners have effective alternative remedy of filing appeal under Section 25 (d) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, and therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. 4. Sri Gautam Baghel, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the finding of the Prescribed Authority with regard to the fact that the three members namely Shivganesh Das, Ashok Yadav and Namwar Chauhan have not been inducted in accordance with bye- laws of the Society, is contradictory inasmuch as on the one hand the Prescribed Authority records a finding that they are the members of the Society and on other hand the Prescribed Authority holds that they have not been validly inducted. 5. Be that as it may, the contention advanced by Sri Gautam Baghel, learned counsel for the petitioners can very well be looked into by the Prescribed Authority who is empowered to re- appreciate the finding of fact, therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders at this stage considering the fact that the disputed questions of facts are involved in the present writ petition. 6. In such view of the fact, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. In case the petitioner prefers an appeal within a period of one month from today before the Appellate Authority, the same shall be considered on merits without entering into the question of limitation. 7. In case petitioners prefer any stay application before the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority is expected to consider the same in accordance with law. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 Mohit Digitally signed by :- MOHIT KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad