Satish Chandra. J. - (1.) THIS appeal has been filed, by the State and the officials of. its education department. It is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge. whereby he quashed an order appointing an autho rised, controller for the Arya Kanva Inter College. Jhansi.
(2.) ON 21st April. 1971 the Di rector of Education U. P. served upon the Manager of the College a notice pur porting to be under Section 16-D (2) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act. It enumerated 19 irregularities and de fects in the working of the institution and stated that the mentioned irregulari ties made it clear that the management of the college was not being conducted properly and that the instructions issu ed by the Department were being re peatedly evaded. It required the insti tution to remedy the defects and to submit an explanation under Section 16-D (2). The management submitted a detailed explanation on 14th May 1971. Thereafter, the Director made some further queries by his letter dated May 26. 1971, to which a reply was sent by the management on 3rd June 1971. On December 21. 1971. the State Gov ernment passed an order under Section 16-D (4) (I) of the Act. This order stat ed that after considering the recom mendations made by the Director under Section 16-D (3) (I) of the Act. the Gov ernment was of the opinion that the explanation furnished by the institution to the notice served upon it. was not satisfactory. Irregularities were still ex isting in the College, as a result of which misadministration was rampant in the institution. In these circumstances, it had become impossible for the affairs of the institution to be run properly and so. it was necessary to appoint an au thorised controller. The order went on to state that the District Inspector of Schools. Jhansi. was being appointed as the authorised controller for a period of one year, who would remove the irregularities and mismanagement in the institution within this period. The management felt aggriev ed and instituted a writ petition in this Court. The order appointing the autho rised controller was challenged on a variety of grounds. A learned Single Judge was impressed by one of them. He held that before passing an order under sub-section (4) of Section 16-D, the State Government must give an op portunity of showing cause to the ma nagement of the institution. No such opportunity was given. Further, although the impugned order states that upon a consideration of the report of the Di rector of Education, the State. Govern ment was satisfied -that there was mis management in -the -institution, .it gave no. - instances : of acts of mismanagement. It seems blindly to have followed the report of the Director. On this twin ground, it was held-that the order vio lated. the principles :6f natural ; -justice and was liable to be quashed. Aggriev ed the State' authorities have; come' up in appeal.
(3.) .Section 16-D in so far as it is material states :- "16-D. Inspection of recognised in stitution removal of defects- (11 The Director may cause a re cognised institution to be. inspected from time to time. (2) The Director may direct a ma nagement to remove any defect or defi ciency found on inspection or otherwise. (3) If the management fails to com ply with any direction made under sub section (21, the Director may. after con sidering the explanation or representa tion, if any. given or made by the ma nagement. (a) refer the case to the Board for withdrawal of recognition or...... (b) recommend theState Govern ment to proceed against the institution under sub-section (4). (41 If on the receipt of a recom mendation under sub-section (31 the State Government is satisfied that- (a) the affairs of the recognised in stitution are being mismanaged; or (b) the management of the institu tion has wilfully or persistently failed in the performance of its duties; or (c) the institution is being conduct ed otherwise than in accordance with the scheme of Administration; or (d) the draft of the Scheme of Ad ministration has not been submitted within the time allowed. It may by order make provision- (i) for exercising control over such institution by authorising any person (hereinafter referred to as an 'Authoris ed Controller'1 to exercise with respect to such institution and its management for such period as may be specified by the Government such functions of con trol as may be specified in the order and on the making of such order the institution and its management, as -the case may be, shall so long as the order continues in force be conducted and carried on in accordance with any di rection given by the Authorised Con troller in accordance with the provisions of the order and every person having any function of management of such in stitution shall cemply with such direc tions; and (ii) for any incidental or supple mentary matter which appears to the State Government necessary or expedi ent for the purpose of the order. The period for -which -an order under this sub-section is made may. be -ex tended by the Government from time to time: : Provided' that the period for which the initial order under 'this' sub-section is: 'made ' shall' hot "exceed ' the period' of one year: Provided further that it -shall' be lawful for an institution to' submit a draft of: the Scheme of Administration and for the Director to approve it with or without modification in accordance with the provisions of 'Section 16-C. in so far as they are applicable and on the approval of the said Scheme: the order made under this sub-section in pursuance of clause (dl shall be with drawn." The scheme of the section in rela tion to the power of the Board to With draw the recognition as well as the power of the State Government to ap point an Authorised Controller, is that Director of Education is to require the management to remove the defects or deficiencies found in inspection or other wise. If the management fails to com ply with any direction, the Director is to make his recommendations, after considering the explanation or repre sentation given by the management. One of the recommendations can be to the State Government to appoint an Autho rised Controller. The State Government under sub- section (41 has to be satisfied that one or more of the four grounds mentioned in clauses (al to (dl thereof exist. On reaching such satisfaction, the State Government is to appoint an Au thorised Controller. In the scheme of things, the role of the Director is that of" an enquiry officer, who is to collect facts and material as well as the ex planation of the management and make his recommendations to the State Gov ernment. The State Government passes an order after considering the explana tion as well as the recommendation. Section 16-D provides for an opportu nity of explanation to the management at the stage when the matter is in. the hands of the Director. The Director makes his recommendations after con sidering the explanation furnished the management the State Government acts on receipt of the recommendations of the Director. This means that the State Government considers the material collected by the Director including the explanation of the management. The material collected by the Director will consist of the notice given by him to the management, its reply or explana tion and the recommendations of the Director himself. The State Government has to make up its mind after consider ing those materials. Section 16-D does not authorise the State Government to consider any other material or matter. Since Section 16-D specifically provides for an opportunity of explanation at a preceding stage and does not make any provision there for at the stage when the matter comes up before the State Government, an implication that the Legislature intended another opportu nity of explanation at the stage when the matter was before the State Gov ernment cannot be read or inferred.;