Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

PHOOLWATI AND ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P.AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Phoolwati And Another v. State Of U.P.And Others - WRIT - C No. 39493 of 2004 [2005] RD-AH 1413 (26 May 2005)

 

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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Reserved.

               Writ Petition No.  39493 of 2004.

Phoolwati & another                                       Petitioners

                                   Vs.

State of U. P. & another                                   Respondents.

       

                                 ******************

Hon. Vikram Nath, J.

This petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 27.07.2002 (Annexure 14 to the writ petition) passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bagpat (respondent no. 4) whereby the office bearer elected in the election held on 23.12.2001 in respect of the Committee of Management, Adarsh Bhartiya Chandra Lal Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Sabha, Dutt Nagar, District Bagpat ( in short referred to as the Institution) have been accorded approval. Further prayer made in the writ petition is to issue direction for appointment of Authorized Controller and further command the Authorized Controller to get membership of institution finalized and, thereafter to hold fresh election in accordance with the scheme of administration.

In paragraph one of the writ petition it has been stated that the order dated 27.07.2002 impugned in the present writ petition was challenged by means of Writ Petition No. 47602 of 2002 filed by Chandra Lal one of the life members and also the husband of the petitioner no. 1, however, as Chandra Lal died on 06.08.2004 the said writ petition was dismissed on the ground that as the membership is not inheritable, therefore, no cause of action survives. It is, thereafter that this present writ petition has been filed by other members.

It appears that the elections were held by the Authorized Controller, who was managing the affairs of the institution, for constitution of the office Bearers of the Managing Committee on 26.12.1993. The voter list consisted of 638 members of the general body of the society. It further appears that the petitioners were at Sl. No.90 and 298 of the said list of 638 members. In the elections held on 26.12.1993 Sri Brahm Singh was elected as Manager (contesting respondent) and the said elections were recognized by the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, on 21.05.1994.  Subsequent to the recognition granted on 21.05.1994, the Deputy Director of Education passed an order on 10.06.1994 for removal of the Authorised Controller already appointed so that the newly elected Committee of Management may take over. However, vide order dated 11.08.1995 the District Inspector of Schools suspended the Committee of Management headed by Sri Brahma Singh but the said order of 11.08.1995 was stayed by the High Court in Writ Petition No. 23719 of 1995. As such Sri Brahma Singh continued to be the Manager of the Institution and the Managing Committee elected on 26.12.1993 continued to manage the affairs of the Institution.

It further appears that the next elections were held on 19.01.1997 by the Committee of Management, headed by Sri Brahma Singh, which was in power, and the said elections were also recognized on 03.05.1997. Thus the committee headed by Sri Brahma Singh which was elected in 1993 continued even after the next election of 1997 and at least till 2001, when the District Inspector of Schools by order dated 13.02.2001 recommended for appointment of Authorized Controller and an order to the said effect was passed by the Joint Director Education on 14.02.2001. Sri Brahma Singh filed Writ Petition No. 7529 of 2001 challenging the order dated 13.02.2001 and 14.02.2001, which were stayed by this Court vide order dated 01.03.2001 and thus Sri Brahma Singh continued as the Manager of the Institution.

Thereafter appears that a complaint was made to the District Inspector of Schools to direct that elections of the office bearers of the Committee of Management may be held within the collage premises to avoid any bungling in the elections. On the said complaint dated 08.11.2001, the District Inspector of Schools appointed Sri Ishwar Chandra Tyagi, former Principal of the Institution to be the Election Officer and further directed that the elections may be conducted within the college premises. The Election Officer issued election programme on 14.12.2001, which was also published in the daily newspapers Dainik Jagaran for holding the elections on 23.12.2001. The elections were conducted and papers were submitted to the District Inspector of Schools for approval. In the meantime again complaint were made on behalf of the petitioner alleging that fake election have been shown and in fact no election took place on 23.12.2001. The Joint Director of Education vide letter dated 01.01.2001 directed the District Inspector of Schools to enquire into the complaint with regard to the dispute of the Committee of Management. The District Inspector of Schools issued notices calling both sides and, thereafter, vide order dated 27.07.2002 granted permission to the elections held on 23.12.2001. This order, which is impugned in the present writ petition and had earlier been challenged by Sri Chandra Pal in Writ Petition No. 47602 of 2002 in which an interim order was passed on 01.11.2002 staying the operation of the order dated 27.07.2002 and also directing the District Inspector of Schools to make alternative arrangement for managing the affairs of the Institution.

Counter and rejoinder affidavits and also supplementary counter affidavit have been exchanged between the parties.

I have heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri S.D. Shukla, Advocate, for the petitioners, Sri S.A. Gilani and Sri N.L. Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent no. 5 and the learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1 to 4.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that firstly that the voter list from which elections were held in the year 1993 and 1997 consisted of 638 members whereas the impugned elections in dispute held on 23.12.2001 consisted of only 21 members, thus the impugned elections were not real and only fake. It is further contended that the objections with regard to voter list was taken before the District Inspector of Schools but the District Inspector of Schools without considering or deciding the objections raised has passed a completely non speaking order on 27.07.2002 granting recognition to the elections held on 23.12.2001. It is therefore urged that the order of District Inspector of Schools dated 27.07.2002 be set aside.

On behalf of respondent no. 5 it has been contended that the elections were validly held on 23.12.2001, there is no irregularity in the same, the Committee headed by Sri Brahma Singh (respondent no. 5) has been managing the affairs right from 1993 and in fact the petitioners are not the members of the Committee, and therefore, have no locus to maintain writ petition. It is also urged on behalf of the respondents that the general body of the Committee consists of only 21 members and not 638 members as alleged by the petitioner. Some distinction with regard to general body of the Society and that of the Committee was also sought to be argued by the respondents. It was also urged that there are two Societies and two Committees of two institutions having almost similar names with a slight difference, which are being confused by the petitioner to take under advantage. It is also contended that the petitioners in case they are raising any dispute with regard to their membership may get the same declared and adjudicated from the civil court and they cannot maintain writ petition before this Court. The question of membership being dispute question of fact cannot be decided in writ jurisdiction.

The last elections were held on 23.12.2001, and as the term of the elected office bearer as per clause 7 of the scheme of administration being only 3 years it expired on 23.12.2004. Fresh elections are therefore already due. It would therefore be appropriate that the elections itself may be held afresh under supervision of the Joint Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut, who shall appoint an officer subordinate him as the Election Officer to conduct the elections in fair manner and will submit his report whereupon approval may be accorded in accordance with law.  Needless to say the list of voters shall be determined first by the Election Officer so appointed on the basis of the material placed before him with regard to various objections being raised by the parties as referred to above in the preceding paragraphs or any other objection which they may raise and after affording due opportunity to them.

The District Inspector of Schools Baghpat shall ensure that fresh elections be held as early as possible in any case within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

The undisputed position from the pleadings is that the committee headed by Brahma Singh was in actual and effective control of the affairs of the institution right from 1993. Looking to the facts and circumstances that the Committee headed by Brahma Singh was continuing to manage the affairs of the Society since 1993 I would have directed it to be restored but as there has been an interim order since November 2002 staying the approval dated 27.07.2002 and direction for alternative arrangement had been made by this Court which continued till 27.08.2004 when Writ Petition No. 47602 of 2002 was dismissed and thereafter order of status quo is continuing in this petition since 01.10.2004 it would not be proper to restore the Committee of Brahma Singh after expiry of the term. Further Brahma Singh in his counter affidavit has not claimed to be in effective control as on 24.09.2004 from which date the status quo position was maintained. Therefore let the alternative arrangement already made and existing continue till the next Committee is constituted after the elections, which are to be held within a fixed period as directed above.

With the aforesaid observations, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.  

Dated:   26.05.2005.

v.k.updh. (v-84)


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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