Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


C/M Inter College Thru' Its Manager And Another v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. - 43501 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 15297 (11 September 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 33

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.43501 OF 2007

Committee of Management, and another


State of U.P. and other.

Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.

Petitioner claims that valid election of the Managing Committee had been held on 28.5.2006. After the said elections have been held , papers were transmitted to the D.I.O.S. for forwarding the same to the Regional Level Committee for according recognition of the said election, as after enforcement of Government Order dated 19.12.2000, it is the Regional Level Committee, which has to take decision in the said respect. As no action was being taken in this background Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 51348 of 2006 before this court and this court on 15.9.2006 asked the Regional Level Committee to take decision in the matter. On 6.10.2006 Regional Committee took up the matter and did not proceed to accord recognition of the election dated 28.5.2006 and mentioned that it would not be at all appropriate to take decision till dispute in respect of membership is adjudicated by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fatehpur. Admittedly against the order dated 6.10.2006 Managing Committee of the Institution has not chosen to question the validity of the aforementioned order and thus undisputed position which covers the field, as on date is that election dated 28.5.2006 has not at all been recognised. As term of the Managing Committee had already run out and election had not at all been recognised, in this background D.I.O.S. proceeded to exercise and invoke the authority of single operation under section 5 (1) of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971. Thereafter without disclosing any reason whatsoever, said order was sought to be kept in abeyance on 22.12.2006 and thereafter on 18.7.2007 order which was passed on 27.12.2006 has been recalled and order dated 11.12.2006 has been restored. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.

Sri Durga Singh, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case there was no occasion for D.I.O.S., Fatehpur for recalling of the order dated 27.12.2006 and as such exercise of authority is patently misuser of the authority and as such impugned order in question is liable to be quashed.

From the side of caveator, Sri B. Ram, Advocate has entered appearance and contended that once there is no recognition of Managing Committee, then Ex. Manager whose tenure has run out, has no authority to operate account jointly, as such no interference be made , as any interference would amount to restoring of illegal order.

After respective arguments have been advanced, undisputed factual position, which is emerging is that election dated 28.5.2006 has not at all been recognised by the Regional Level Committee till date. D.I.O.S., Fatehpur on 11.12.2006 passed considerate order that tenure of erstwhile Committee Management has run out, as such single operation should be there. Thereafter, D.I.O.S., Fatehpur for no rhyme or reason proceeded to pass order dated 27.12.2006. Thereafter, said order has been recalled by means of the impugned order. The joint operation of the account of the institution under Section 24 of 1971 clearly envisages, joint operation by validly recognised nominee/representative of the Managing Committee and not through the Management, whose tenure has run out. What cannot be done directly, cannot be permitted to done indirectly. Order, which has been passed on 11.12.2006 for single operation of the account, was for the reason, that term of Managing Committee has run out. In absence of duly recognised nominee of the management not being there , rightful order has been passed, and same warrants no interference.

Consequently, writ petition is dismissed.

Dt. 11.9.2007



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.