High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
C/M, Adarsh Janta Inter College, Ghazipur And Another v. State Of U.P. Thru' Education Secretary (M) And Others - WRIT - C No. - 56351 of 2006  RD-AH 15532 (14 September 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved on 30.08.2007
Delivered on 24.09.2007
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37802 of 2007
Committee of Management Amar
Veer Inter College and others
State of U.P. & others
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 30011 of 2007
Committee of Management Amar
Veer Inter College and others
State of U.P. & others
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
In the district of Chandauli, there is a Society registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which is named as ''Shksha Prasar Samiti, Dhanapur, District Chandauli. Said society runs and manages an educational institution known as Amarvir Inter College., Dhanapur, District Chandauli. Said institution is governed under the provisions of U.P. Act No. II of 1921 and by virtue of being in grant-in-aid list of the State Government the provisions of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971 are fully applicable to the said institution. Last election of Managing Committee of the institution was held in the month of October, 2001 wherein Shri Prem Narain Upadhyay as elected as President and Sri Keshav Prasad Singh as Manager and Sri Munnu Rastogi as Assistant Manager alongwith other office bearers of the Committee of Management. Shri Keshav Prasad Singh died on 17.11.2004 and entire papers were under his custody and after his death no papers were available. Thereafter on 26.11.2004 meeting took place wherein petitioner no. 2 Munnu Ram Rastogi, claims that he was co-opted as Manager-Secretary of the Managing Committee the society as well as the institution and was authorized to convene meeting by publishing notice in the newspaper in regard to the enrolment of new members so that next elections be held. Petitioners have contended that despite best efforts papers were not traceable as such notarial affidavit has been filed for attestation of signature of petitioner no. 2 before the District Inspector of Schools and thereafter District Inspector of Schools granted recognition on 16.12.2004 and attested the signature of petitioner no. 2. Petitioners have further contended that meeting of the Committee of Management was held on 19.12.2004 after issuing notices to members of Committee of Management to consider as the record pertaining to the institution was not available for framing scheme of administration and its approval by Regional Joint Director of Education. Petitioners have further contended that thereafter Scheme of Administration was submitted under covering letter dated 23.05.2006 and said scheme of administration was approved on 27.05.2006. Complaint was made that said approval has been obtained by practising fraud and in between election process was undertaken by publishing election programme in daily newspaper Amar Ujala on 12.08.2006 and thereafter Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45530 of 2006 was filed before this Court and this Court on 23.08.2006 asked the Regional Joint Director of Education to decide the objection and thereafter petitioner claims that election dated 09.09.2006 have been held in the presence of Observer appointed by the District Inspector of Schools and papers was submitted before the District Inspector of Schools for its transmission to the Regional Level Committee. Then thereafter pursuant to order dated 23.08.2006 passed by this Court, Regional Joint Director of Education took up the matter in respect of grant of approval to the Scheme of Administration and on 25.11.2006 order was passed cancelling the approval granted to the Scheme of Administration. Against said order passed by Regional Joint Director of Education Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69713 of 2006 was filed before this Court by the petitioner's Committee of Management. Said writ petition was dismissed on 16.01.2007 giving liberty to petitioners to approach authority concerned as per order mentioned. Thereafter petitioners' under covering letter dated 27.01.2007 represented the matter and it has been informed that till date no decision has been taken on the same. District Inspector of Schools on 12.06.2007 passed order mentioning therein that till recognition is not granted order of single operation shall be there. Against the said order Civil Misc. Writ Petition 30011 of 2007 has been filed and this Court on 09.07.2007 stayed the order dated 12.06.2007. Thereafter on 02.08.2007 Authorized Controller has been appointed and earlier elections held to be illegal. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.
Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no. 5 and it has been contended therein that Sri Keshav Prasad Singh remained Manager of the institution as well as Secretary of the society since 1961 till his death. Tenure of Managing Committee was three years and subsequently it was extended to five years by way of amendment introduced by the Committee of Management which as approved by the Regional Joint Director of Education on 09.11.2000 and after death of Keshav Prasad, Sri Munnu Ram Rastogi who was Deputy Manager was made Manager for the remainder period. It has been contended that Munnu Ram Rastogi after becoming Manager with a view to have full control over the institution run by the Society prepared new Scheme of Administration and got it approved by the Regional Joint Director of Education on 27.05.2006. It has further contended that order dated 27.05.2006 was obtained by practicing fraud and when representation was moved, as fraud and misrepresentation was apparent said order was recalled. It has been further stated that two Civil Suits being Civil Suit No. 89 of 1968 had been filed in the past by Akshaibar Singh wherein late Keshav Prasad Singh had been arrayed as defendant no. 1 and similarly Civil Suit No. 19 of 1973 had also been filed and in both Civil Suits Scheme of Administration which existed, had been filed as such Scheme of Administration is in existence and petitioners have tried to manipulate the thing for taking advantage of present situation. It has been contended that matter was represented before the Regional Joint Director of Education and thereafter Regional Joint Director of Education called for report from District Inspector of Schools but the District Inspector of Schools did not submit any report and on the other hand accorded permission to the petitioner to hold fresh election. It has further been contended that no meeting of Managing Committee of the institution was held to decide the election programme and it has been contended that entire act of the petitioners is only to grab the institution. In this background it has been contended that decision in question is rightful decision and no interference be made.
Rejoinder affidavit has been filed and therein statement of fact mentioned in the counter affidavit has been disputed and that of writ petition has been reiterated.
After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties.
Sri Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Irshad Ali Advocate, contended with vehemence that in the present case opinion which has been formed is totally incorrect opinion in view of the pending application of the petitioners for according approval to the new Scheme of Administration and impugned order could not have been passed unless and until any decision was taken in respect of accepting/rejection of new Scheme of Administration and ipso facto election held could have been held to be not illegal and the order passed is unsustainable and is liable to be quashed. Order of single operation is also unsustainable as there is no default.
Sri G.K. Singh, Advocate, appearing on behalf of respondent no. 5 on the other hand contended that entire claim of the petitioner is an outcome of manipulation and maneuvering and petitioners have tired to manipulate the things in this background it has been contended that there is no scope of interference and writ petition deserves to be dismissed, as any interference would be perpetuating manipulation and maneovering.
Learned Standing Counsel simply followed the arguments advanced by Sri G.K. Singh Advocate.
After respective arguments have been advanced factual position which is emerging in the present case is that there has been approved Scheme of Administration for running and managing the affairs of the institution framed in exercise of power vested under Section 16(A) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921. In the said Scheme of Administration amendment has been introduced by extending the term of the Committee of Management from three years to five years. Said amendment has been approved on 09.11.2000 by the Regional Joint Director of Education.
Sri Keshav Prasad Singh, died on 17.11.2004 and thereafter petitioner no. 2 who was Deputy Manager was asked to function as Manager of the Committee of Management of institution. Papers were transmitted to District Inspector of Schools, and signatures of petitioner no. 2 was attested on 16.12.2004. Thereafter parties are at dispute practically on all issues. Qua petitioner no. 2 it has been contended that in order to have full control over the affairs of the institution large scale manipulation was made by him and in spite of the fact that there existed Scheme of Administration with false misrepresentation fresh Scheme of Administration was got prepared and subsequently got approved by Regional Joint Director of Education on 27.05.2006. Prem Narain Upadhya the President of erstwhile Managing Committee had filed Civil Misc. Writ petition No. 45530 of 2006 wherein fraud practiced by Mannu Ram Rastogi was highlighted and this Court asked Regional Joint Director of Education to look into the matter on 23.08.2006. On 09.09.2006, petitioners claim to have held the elections of Managing Committee. Regional Joint Director of Education on 25.11.2006, cancelled the approval accorded to the Scheme of Administration on on 25.07.2006 with observations that said order has been upheld in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69713 of 2006. Regional Joint Director of Education in order dated 25.11.2006 has clearly mentioned that earlier approval was obtained by fraud and in case due to non availability of earlier Scheme of Administration, after giving full details fresh proposal be sent. Thereafter, fact of the matter is that by mentioning that earlier incorrect statement was incorrectly mentioned and Scheme of Administration be accorded approval. Till date on the said request no action has been taken. As far as election dated 09.09.2006 no credibility could be attached to the said election as admittedly said election has been held as per provisions of the Scheme of Administration, approval of which was based on fraud and misrepresentation. Even if any action is taken on representation dated 08.05.2006 and said Scheme of Administration is accepted the same would at the best apply prospectively in terms of Section 16-A (5) of U.P. Act No. II of 1921. Much emphasis has been laid, that Regional Joint Director of Education ought to have placed the matter before Regional Committee, constituted under Government Order dated 19.12.2000. On admitted position as entire election proceeding was based on the provisions of Scheme of Administration approval of which was based on fraud and misrepresentation, then Regional Joint Director of Education is not at all wrong in saying something null and void as null and void. Further exercise was not at all liable to be undertaken.
In these circumstances it is hereby directed that Prabhand Sanchalak shall continue to run and manage the affairs of the institution and Regional Joint Director of Education shall go into the question of availability of the old Scheme of Administration specially keeping in view of the fact that two civil suits which had been filed way back in year 1968 and 1973 wherein copy of Scheme of Administration had been filed and therein Keshav Prasad Singh had been arrayed as defendant-respondent, qua whom there is no dispute, as to whether Keshav Pradad Singh had accepted the existence of said Scheme of Administration be also examined and once finding of fact is returned that old Scheme of Administration is there then election be held strictly in consonance with the provision as contained in Scheme of Administration from amongst valid members of General Body and in case Scheme of Administration is not there then claim of petitioners, as to whether Scheme of Administration submitted by them could be accepted or not be considered and if said Scheme of Administration is accepted then steps be undertaken for holding of elections from amongst valid members of the general body.
Civil Misc. Writ petition No. 30011 of 2007 is dismissed as infructuous, as appointment of Prabhandha Sanchalak has been upheld. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37802 of 2007 is disposed of with the direction mentioned above.
No orders as to cost.
Dated: 24th September,2007
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.