Sanjay Misra - (1.) HEARD Sri Shailendra, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents were granted time to file counter- affidavit by the order dated 21.8.2009 and although more than one year has passed no counter-affidavit has been filed. Sri S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 prays for further time to file counter-affidavit which is strongly opposed by Sri Shailendra saying that by the impugned order the petitioner is suffering and the respondent is adjourning the matter by taking time, therefore, the matter be heard. In view of the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties the matter has been heard and is being decided today itself with their consent. The petitioner claims himself to be a member of the general body of the Society which is running the institution Janta Inter College, Nagal, Saharanpur and is also the complainant against the Committee of Management elected on 6.11.2008. Sri Shailendra has submitted that the Regional Level Committee by the impugned order dated 12.6.2009 has not complied with the directions issued by the Division Bench in Special Appeal No. 1565 of 2008 (Arjun Singh v. State of U.P.) decided on 7.11.2008 along with Writ Petition No. 54055 of 2003. His second submission is that having not considered the detailed objection filed by the petitioner relating to the election, electoral college and the persons who participated in the election, the Regional Level Committee could not have rejected the objections of the petitioner or approved the election of the Committee of Management. His other submission is that although in the impugned order the objections of the petitioner have been referred to in quite some detail but none of them has been considered and hence also it is a case where the Regional Level Committee has not applied its mind to the objections made by the petitioner and has illegally passed the impugned order. He further states that the Regional Level Committee was required to see the correctness or in correctness of the order dated 6.11.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools but it has failed to do so and in effect it has only considered the procedural aspect of the election alleged to have been held on 6.11.2008.
(3.) SRI S.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 has referred to the directions issued by the Division Bench in the order dated 7.11.2008 and states that the same has been duly complied with in the impugned order and insofar as the objections of the petitioner relating to events from the year 1980-81 upto date are concerned they were neither subject matter of consideration by the Division Bench nor they were required to be considered by the Regional Level Committee. In rejoinder Sri Shailendra has submitted that admittedly one Sri Vinay Kumar is claimed to have been inducted in the general body on 14.2.1975 at which time he was a minor having been born on 22.10.1960 and, therefore, once it was established that Sri Vinay Kumar was not eligible for membership or to hold any office of the Committee of Management for the reason of being a minor, any subsequent claim of membership made by him in the absence of fresh membership would not cure the illegality whereby Sri Vinay Kumar was clearly disqualified and, therefore, the impugned order has illegally held that after 34 years of membership of Sri Vinay Kumar the objections cannot now be entertained.;