COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT OF SHRI GANDHI MAHA VIDYALAYA (HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL), MALAYANGAR MALAP, DIST. BALLIA AND ANOTHER Vs. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS, BALLIA AND ANOTHER
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Committee Of Management Of Shri Gandhi Maha Vidyalaya (Higher Secondary School), Malayangar Malap, Dist. Ballia And Another
District Inspector Of Schools, Ballia And Another
Click here to view full judgement.
N.D.Ojha, J. -
(1.)A letter was sent by one Tarkeshwar Pandey to the District Inspector of Schools Ballia on 15-10-79 attaching thereto a copy of the minutes of a meeting of Karya Kanni Samiti of Sri Gandhi Mahavidyalaya, Malayanagar Malap, district Ballia, said to have been held on 14th Oct., 1979 stating that the Committee of Mananement of Sri Gandhi Mahavidyalaya, Malayanagar Malp Ballia had been constituted in the said meeting Tarkeshwar Pandey was elected President alongwith other office bearers. On receiving an intimation in this behalf the petitioners filed an objection before the District Inspector of Schools denying the claim made by Tarkeshwar Pandey and asserting that a Committee of Management had already been constituted on 26th Feb., 1978 in which the petitioner no. 2 Sri Jagdish Yati had been elected Manager. At this place it may be pointed out that the claim of the petitioners that any election had taken place on 26th Feb., 1978, has been disputed by the counsel for the respondents. The District Inspector of Schools passed an order on 8th Feb., 1980 giving recognition to the Committee of Management said to have been constituted on 14th Oct., 1979 as asserted by Tarkeshwar Pandey. It is this order dated 8th Feb., 1980 by the District Inspector of Schools which is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.
(2.)Several points . have been raised in this writ petition but it is not necessary to consider each one of them inasmuch as in our opinion the impugned order passed by the District Inspector of Schools deserves to be quashed on the submission referred to below made by the counsel for the petitioner.
(3.)Counsel for the petitioners submits that Sri Gandhi Mahaviyalaya. Malayanagar, Malap. District Ballia (hereinafter referred to as the college) is being managed in accordance with a Scheme of Administration prepared in pursuance of Sec. 16-A of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to as said Act) and the election in question has been held in its contravention. A copy of the Scheme of Administration has been attached as Annexure 2 to the writ petition. Paragraphs 4 and 5 deals with the Committee of Management and its constitution. They read as follows :
"4. Committee of Management :-The authority to manage and conduct the affairs of the institution shall vest in the Committee of Management which shall be responsible for properly running the institution in accordance with the provision of the Act, the Regulations and the instructions issued from time to time by the authority of Education Department of U. P."
5. Constitution of the Committee - The Committee shall have the following 13 members including the 2 ex-officio members (i. e. the Principal and the two teachers representatives) according to Sec. 16-A -
(1) of the Act and regulations (1) Chapter I.
(A) Ordinary members 10 to be elected by the society from amongst its own members.
(B) Ex-officio members - 2. The principal and two teachers, representatives shall be the ex-officio members according to Sec. 16-A (L) of the Act and Regulations (1), Chapter I.
(C) Members of the Committee of Management so constituted will elect the following office bearers from amongst themselves ; -
(I) President. (2) Vice-President. (3) Manager. (4) Assistant Manager. (5) Treasurer.
Note - The principal and the two teachers representatives will not take part in the election of the office beaters."
A copy of the letter sent on 15th Oct., 1979 by Terkeshwar Pandey to the District Inspector of Schools referred to above has been filed as Annexure-2 to the counter-affidavit of Ram Janam Singh, respondent no. 2. This letter contains a statement of fact that a copy of the minutes of the meeting is being attached. Annexure-2 filed along with the counter-affidavit, however, does not contain any copy of the minutes of the meeting. Second copy for the use of the bench, however, contains a copy even of the minutes It appears that the copy of the minutes was inadvertently omitted from being attached along with annexure-2 in the original counter-affidavit. However, a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners today attaching thereto a copy of the minutes of the meeting said to have been held on 14th Oct., 1979. A copy of this supplementary affidavit has been served on counsel for the respondents and the correctness of the copy of the minutes of the meeting dated 14th Oct., 199 filed along with the supplementary affidavit has not been disputed by the counsel for the respondents. A perusal of paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Scheme of Administration indicates that the Society has to first elect ten persons out of its members as the members of the Committee of Management and the ten persons so elected are in their turn to elect the office bearers of the Committee of Management. The Committee of Management is to constitute these ten persons, me Principal of the college and two representatives of the teachers. It has been pointed by the counsel for the petitioners that from a perusal of the minutes of the meeting said to have been held on 14th Oct., 1979 it is apparent that while considering item nos. 1 and 2 of the agenda namely the election of the President and Secretary Manager, only four members were present namely Sarvasri Ramji Misra, Ram Janam Singh, Krishna Singh and Tarkeshwar Pandey. On its basis it was urged that the election of the Committee of Management was not held on 14th Oct., 19/9 in accordance with the requirement of the Scheme of Administration which was prepared in pursuance of the statutory requirement contained in Sec. 16-A of the said Act. In this connection reliance was also placed on sub-section (6) of Sec. 16-A which contemplates that every recognized institution shall be managed in accordance with the Scheme of Administration framed under and in accordance with sub-section (5) and Sections 16-B and 16-G. It has been further urged by the counsel for the petitioners that a perusal of the impugned order passed by the District Inspector of Schools on 8th Feb., 1980 clearly candicates that he did not apply his mind to this aspect of the matter at all. in this connection reliance has been placed on a decision of a division Bench of this Court in Jaswant Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools, [1980 ALJ 174 ; 1981 U.P.L.d.E.C. 43) wherein it was held that the District Inspector of Schools while passing ; orders in such matters has, inter alia, to keep in mind that the enquiry which he has to make for his satisfaction is to be confined to the question as to whether a fresh election has taken place and, if so, who are the persons who nave been elected to constitute the Committee of Management. This inquiry is to be made by first ascertaining as to whether the meeting to hold the election has been convened in accordance with the requirements of the Scheme of administration and any other relevant provision in this behalf applicable to the affairs of the society which runs the institution. It is true that the District Inspector of Schools is not expected to write a detailed judgment as if he were a court of law but none the less as observed in Jaswant Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools, (supra) his order must, indicate that he has applied his mind to the controversy involved before him. A copy of the objection filed by the petitioners to the application made by Tarkeshwar Pandey has been attached as Annexure-5 to the writ petition Its perusal indicates that one of the objections was that the meeting said to have been held on 14th Oct., 1979 was attended by four persons only. There is nothing in the order of the District Inspector of Schools which may indicate that he applied his mind to this aspect of the matter in the light of the requirement of the Scheme of Administration. His order, therefore, cannot be sustained. We wish to make it clear that since we have not considered all the pleas raised in the writ petition, it would be open to the petitioners to raise those pleas before the District Inspector of Schools.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.