HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - C No. - 10175 of 2026 Court No. - 37 HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 30.12.2025 whereby the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi has rejected their claim for renewal of registration of the Society. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that at an earlier point of time also on 01.05.2024, identical claim was rejected by the Assistant Registrar, however, the said order was set aside by the appellate Commissioner by order dated 17.02.2025 and the matter was remanded for reconsideration with specific directions to look into the documents produced by the parties. 3. The contention is that the Assistant Registrar has cursorily rejected the petitioners' claim and, therefore, the order impugned is liable to be set aside. Reference to various documents on record has been made during the course of submissions to contend that the private respondent No.4 is a stranger to the Society. 4. Per contra, learned Standing Counsel submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable in view of availability of alternative remedy of statutory appeal under Section 3-A(2-A) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 ('the Act'). She further submits that on earlier occasion also, identical order passed by the Assistant Registrar was challenged in appeal under the same provision and, therefore, the petition should not be entertained. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Ankur Rai, Vikalp Kumar Rai, Vinod Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Committee of Management, Vidya Mandir Samiti Surahi and another .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and 3 others .....Respondent(s) 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the nature of dispute raised by the petitioners assailing the order impugned is based upon analysis of certain documents which were on record of the Assistant Registrar and which were directed to be considered by him under the order of remand. In case the documents have been wrongly perused or ignored in one way or the other so as to non-suit the petitioners, such aspects can again be raised before the appellate Commissioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to examine the validity of the order impugned, however, considering that one month period is prescribed for preferring appeal and the same has expired in January, 2026, in the interest of justice, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- (i). If the petitioner prefers an appeal under Section 3-A(2-A) of the Act, against order dated 30.12.2025 before the appellate Commissioner within a period of one month from today, the same shall be registered at appropriate number; (ii). The Commissioner shall issue notice to the respondent No.4 and shall summon the record of the proceedings from the Assistant Registrar; (iii). Thereafter, the appeal shall be decided on merits after providing full opportunity of hearing to the rival parties within a period of next three months by fixing short dates; (iv). It is made clear that appeal shall not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. March 18, 2026 Jyotsana WRIC No. 10175 of 2026 2 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) Digitally signed by :- JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad