Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

C/M JANTA INTER COLLEGE & ANOTHER versus STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


C/M Janta Inter College & Another v. State Of U.P. & Others - WRIT - C No. 4349 of 2004 [2005] RD-AH 6784 (2 December 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

                                                                                       Court No.38

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.  4349 of 2004

Committee of Management of Janta

Inter College and another

Versus

State of U.P. & others

Hon'ble Vineet Saran, J

The dispute in the present writ petition is with regard to the election of the Committee of Management of Janta Inter College,  Bargawa Kuba, district Mirzapur. Briefly, the facts relevant for the decision of this case are that the Janta Inter College is a recognized Intermediate College and is receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government. In the year 1995, the elections of the Committee of Management were held in which petitioner no. 2, Mast Ram Singh was elected as Manager and his signatures were duly attested by the District Inspector of Schools on 9.1.1996.  On completion of the term of three years fresh elections were held on 21.6.1998 in which the petitioner no. 2 was again elected as Manager and his signatures were duly attested thereafter. The dispute in this writ petition is with regard to elections after completion of the term of three years from 1998.

The case of the petitioner is that the fresh elections were held on 24.6.2001, in which the petitioner no. 2 was again elected as Manager of the Committee of Management. However, the papers for recognizing the elections were forwarded from the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur to the Regional Committee on 6.12.2001. After the Regional Joint Director of Education had asked the petitioners to supply the necessary information and documents, which were not fully supplied, the Regional Committee, on 2.1.2003, passed an order refusing to recognize the elections dated 24.6.2001 and directed appointment of an Authorized Controller. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 2459 of 2003, which was disposed of on 31.7.2003 with the direction that since the matter had been decided by the Regional Committee without affording adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, the said Committee may decide the matter afresh after affording such opportunity to the petitioners. Thereafter notices were issued by the Joint Director of Education to the petitioner as well as respondent no. 5, on whose complaint the dispute had arisen. Then by order dated 17.12.2003, the Regional Committee again, by a detailed reasoned order, refused to recognize the elections held on 24.6.2001 and again directed for appointment of an Authorized Controller, who was to hold the election of the Committee of Management afresh, within a period of three months. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 17.12.2003, the petitioners have approached this Court with the prayer for quashing the same and also for a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the affairs of the Committee of Management.

I have heard Sri N.C.Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents no. 1 to 4 and Sri Anil Bhushan, learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent no. 5. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.

From the perusal of the impugned order dated 17.12.2003 it is evident that adequate opportunity of adducing evidence and hearing was afforded to the parties. The order refusing to recognize the elections dated 24.6.2001 has been passed on following grounds:- (i) that the list of members which was required to be published six months prior to the date of election was not done so; (ii) that the approval of the list of ordinary members of the society by the District Inspector of Schools ought to have been taken three months prior to the date of election which was not done; (iii) that the publication of notice ought to have been made in a local newspaper two months prior to the election whereas the same was made in the newspaper "Rashtriya Sahara" (published from Lucknow) only 23 days prior to the election; (iv) that the Election Officer appointed for getting the election conducted, got himself elected as the President of the Committee of Management; and (v) that the entire election was held merely in an ordinary meeting without any nomination papers even having been filed by any of the office bearers seeking election on any of the post.

Sri N.C.Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, does not dispute that there may have been the above anomalies in the conduct of elections, but he has submitted that the Regional Committee was not to look into the matter so minutely and meticulously as it has done, as the said Committee was not an Election Tribunal where the election of the Committee of Management had been challenged. This argument of Sri Tripathi is certainly not worthy of acceptance. He has not been able to point out that the grounds for not recognizing the election of the Committee of Management are in any way wrong. It is interesting to note that his sole contention is that as there was no dispute and there is no rival Committee of Management, hence the proceedings of the meeting (in which alleged unanimous election is said to have taken place) ought to have been accepted and the election recognized. It is not disputed by Sri Tripathi that the publication of the list of members which ought to have been made six months prior to the election was not done or the approval of the ordinary members was not taken three months prior to the election or that the advertisement published in the newspaper "Rashtriya Sahara" was only 23 days prior to the election which ought to have been made two months prior and that the newspaper in which the publication was made is of Lucknow and not published locally from Mirzapur. It is also not disputed that the Election Officer who was appointed to get the election conducted, got himself elected as President of the Committee of Management but it has merely been urged that since the election was unanimous, the irregularities or illegalities, if any, ought to be ignored. In the writ petition there is no denial of this fact also that no nomination papers were filled up by any of the candidates seeking election on any of the post. From the above, it is absolutely clear that the elections which were said to have been held on 24.6.2001,  was nothing but a mere farce and none of the conditions, which were required to be fulfilled, had been complied with by the Committee of Management which had got the election conducted. Even otherwise, the last elections, which were recognized by the educational authorities, were held in 1998. After expiry of the three years term, fresh elections were to be held in 2001. Even assuming for argument that the said elections were properly conducted and ought to have been recognized, then too the new elections would have been due in the year 2004, which period has also expired. Undoubtedly, since there has been dispute in the conduct of the elections by the Committee of Management which was last recognized, and large number of irregularities were committed by them in conducting such elections dated 24.6.2001, and especially when fresh elections are already overdue, I see no reason why an independent Authorized Controller is not put as Incharge of the affairs of the Committee of Management, who shall get the elections of the Committee of Management conducted.

For the foregoing reasons, I find no ground whatsoever to interfere with the order impugned in this writ petition. This writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed, with the direction that the Authorized Controller shall take charge of the affairs of the college, and shall get the elections of the Committee of Management held within three months, in accordance with the Scheme of Administration, and after getting the list of the members eligible to vote finalized and duly approved.  No order as to costs.

Dt/-2..12.2005

PS


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.