Ghaziabad: An RWA election held with the participation of authorities can still be declared invalid months later if a resident complains that it was conducted after the society’s term expired. The Allahabad high court has now sought a review of how this ‘time-barred’ provision is being applied, saying repeated challenges to such orders indicate a need to examine the way officials have been discharging their statutory duties.The issue came up before the court after Deshmani Sharma challenged a deputy registrar of firms, societies and chits order declaring his society’s April 5 election ‘time-barred’. Sharma said the term of the RWA at Classic Residency in Raj Nagar Extension expired on Feb 27, but the election process had begun earlier, with general body meetings held on Jan 25 and Feb 1.“Board examinations were underway and Section 144 was also imposed in the city due to Holi and Ramzan. We therefore sought additional time from the deputy registrar,” Sharma said. The election was eventually held on April 5, and the district administration and deputy registrar’s office were kept involved throughout the process, he added.The dispute arose after a resident complained following the election. On June 1, the deputy registrar declared the poll ‘time-barred’, prompting Sharma to move the high court.Under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, an election held after the governing body’s term expires can be treated as ‘time-barred’ if a formal complaint is made by a resident, explained SC lawyer Prashant Kanha. Under Section 25(2), the deputy registrar can then intervene and conduct the election.“If the election has taken place after the time-barred period, the deputy registrar can render it null and void,” Kanha said.Justice Vinod Diwakar, in his July 31 order, noted, “This court is consistently confronted with writ petitions assailing orders passed by the deputy registrar, firms, societies and chits, declaring elections of registered societies as time-barred.”The court said the number of such cases indicated “the need for a systematic review” of how statutory functions were being discharged.It also observed that registrar offices were “not in conformity with the Uttar Pradesh Societies Registration Rules, 1976” and directed the state registrar to inspect compliance with the rules and submit a report.The report, covering the past three years and other relevant provisions, is to be placed before the court on Sept 22.Sanjay Singh, a Crossings Republik resident, said invalidation can force societies into another election at an additional cost of Rs 80,000. “The object of the provisions governing elections is to ensure democratic functioning of the society and not to penalise it for every procedural delay,” he added.Avnish Kumar Singh, deputy registrar in Lucknow, said the court had sought an inspection report on compliance with the relevant provisions for the past three years.
