Janardan Sahai, J. - (1.) The dispute relates to the committee of management entitled to manage Bahu Dhandhi Inter College, Sonahita, Jaunpur an institution governed by the Intermediate Education Act. The last undisputed elections of the committee of management of the institution were held in the year 1991 in which the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was elected as the Manager. The tenure of the committee of management under the scheme of administration is three years. According to the petitioner the elections of the committee of management were held in the year 1994 and 1997 and the committee of the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was elected. The petitioners case is that fresh elections were held on 27.8.2000 in which the committee of the petitioner No. 2 Dukhi Shukla was again elected but it is not in dispute that these elections were not recognised. The case of the respondent No. 4 Nanhkoo Ram Yadav is that elections were held on 27.8.2000 but in this election the committee consisting of Nanhkoo Ram Yadav as the Manager was elected. This committee of management too was not recognised. Two separate sets of elections are then said to have been held on 28.9.2003. One in which the committee of Dukhi Shukla as its Manager was elected, the others according to the respondent No. 4 in which the committee of respondent No. 4 was elected.
(2.) The matter relating to the recognition of these rival committees said to have been elected on 28.9.2003 came up for consideration before the regional committee constituted under Government order dated 19.12.2000. The Joint Director of Education by his impugned order dated 23.6.2004 found that neither the committee of the petitioner nor of the respondent No. 4 can be recognised as the elections were not held in accordance with the scheme of administration. In the opening part of the order of the Joint Director of Education he has observed that the scheme of administration has been amended. According to the new scheme of administration, copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 in Writ Petition No. 27466 of 2004 the tenure of the committee of management is three years and in case fresh elections are not held within a period of one month thereafter the committee of management will become defunct and an authorised controller would have to be appointed. In view of the provisions of the amended scheme of administration the Joint Director of Education has directed that the fresh elections should be held by the authorised controller. Writ Petition No. 27005 of 2004 has been filed against this order by Dukhi Shukla who is represented by Sri Ravi Pratap. Writ Petition No. 27466 of 2004 has been filed by Nanhkoo Ram Yadav represented by Sarvshri G.K. Singh and V.K. Singh.
(3.) Sri Ravi Pratap, learned Counsel for the petitioner challenging the order of the Joint Director of Education submitted that the old scheme of administration was applicable in the institution and not the new scheme. He submits that according to the terms of the old scheme the tenure of the committee of management is three years but the office bearers are to continue until fresh elections are held. He submits that there is no provision for appointment of an authorised controller under the old scheme of administration. No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent No. 4 Nanhkoo Ram Yadav in this case in view of the statement made by Sri A.P. Sahi his counsel that the pleadings set up in the Writ Petition No. 27466 of 2004 filed by Nanhkoo Ram Yadav may be treated as the counter affidavit. The stand of the respondent No. 2 is that the scheme of administration has been amended and the view taken by the Joint Director of Education on the point is correct. There are certain glaring facts and admissions of Dukhi Shukla which go to establish that the scheme of administration applicable to the institution has been amended and the contention of the petitioner that the old scheme of administration is still applicable has no force. After the elections held on 28.9.2003 relied upon by the petitioner Dukhi Shukla he made application to the District Inspector of Schools, Jaunpur on 30.9.2003 that the elections have been held according to the amended scheme. In Writ Petition No. 27005 of 2004 also it has been stated in paragraph 5 that the term of the committee of management is three years and one month. This term of three years and one month is not contemplated under the old scheme and obviously the reference is to the provisions of the amended scheme copy of which has been filed in Writ Petition No. 27466 of 2004. That apart under the provisions of the unamended scheme of administration the committee of management consist of 11 members and of these, four are elected office bearers, four are ordinary members and three are ex officio members. However, according to the amended scheme of administration the total number of members are 15. The constitution of the elected committee of management has been disclosed by the petitioner Dukhi Shukla in Annexure-10 in Writ Petition No. 27005 of 2004. The strength of members in his committee is of seven ordinary members and five office bearers all of whose names have been given and three ex officio members. Thus the total number of members of the committee of management is 15. The strength of the members of the committee of management said to have been constituted by Dukhi Shukla corresponds to the size of the committee contemplated under the amended scheme and not with the old scheme. In view of these glaring facts it is clear that the view taken by the Joint Director of Education that the college is governed by the amended scheme of administration is correct. The logical effect of the finding that the new scheme of administration is applicable is as would presently be seen that neither of the two committees can be recognised. The elections said to have been held in the year 1994, 1997 and 2000 have not been recognised and the old committee of management said to have been elected in the year 1991 having become defunct ft is the Prabandh Sanchalak to hold the elections. It is to be noted that even the elections of the year 2000 relied upon by Dukhi Shukla were not found valid by the Joint Director of Education by order dated 6.2.2003. On these facts the view taken by the Regional Committee/the Joint Director of Education in the order impugned appointing a Prabandh Sanchalak is correct. Sri Ravi Pratap, learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that Nanhkoo Ram Yadav was not even a member of the general body and therefore he had no right to maintain any objection before the Joint Director of Education. In support of his contention he referred to the objection as set out in paragraph 29 of the objections which read as;