Arun Tandon, J. - (1.) Heard Sri Shashi Nandan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Namit Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. It is not necessary to call for counter affidavit from the respondents in view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court in the present writ petition.
(2.) The Committee of Management of Sri Krishna High School, Badaun has filed this writ petition against the notice issued by the District Inspector of Schools dated 24th September, 2004 wherein it is alleged that the petitioner had not complied with the directions issued by the District Inspector of Schools contained in the letter dated 28th October, 1993 inasmuch as necessary amendments in the Scheme of Administration have not been proposed in accordance with the provisons of Sectionl6-CC of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafer referred to as the Act). In view of the aforesaid, it has been directed that the petitioner may show-cause as to why appropriate proceedings for appointment of Prabandh Sanchalak be not initiated.
(3.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the factual foundation laid in the impugned order for issuing the show-cause notice is incorrect inasmuch as the Committee of Management has already submitted proposals in compliance of the provisions of Section 16-CC of the Act before the Joint Director of Education on 6th April, 2004. The Joint Director of Education has not passed any order on the said amendments proposed by the Committee of Management. It is further submitted that the District Inspector of Schools has no authority under law to issue notice for initiating the proceedings for non-compliance of the amended provision of Section 16-CC of the Act inasmuch as if the institution docs not carry out the necessary amendments in the Scheme of Administration as required under the povision of Section 16-CC, the power to take action under Section 16-B, clause (3) is conferrred up on the Joint Director of Education alone. It is further contended that the notice issued by the District Inspector of Schools is without authority of law and therefore, the said notice may be set aside.;