- (1.) It is admitted that the scheme of administration of the institution provides a term of five years and by virtue of Clause 8, as amended, if elections are not held within five years and one month, authorized controller shall be appointed and such authorized controller is to ensure that elections are conducted and a valid body is constituted to act as Committee of Management of the institution. It is admitted in the facts of the present case that no elections, within the term, was conducted by the outgoing Committee and consequently, an authorized controller has been appointed on 20th February, 2016. The order of the Joint Director records that Principal, DIET shall be the authorized controller who shall get the elections conducted under scheme of administration within a period of three months. It appears that elections have not been held by the authorized controller. The authorized controller instead has sent a communication to the District Inspector of Schools to appoint one of the three suggested persons to act as Election Officer. It appears that District Inspector of Schools has appointed fourth respondent as Election Officer, vide order dated 28.11.2016, which is assailed in this petition.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that by virtue of Clause 8 of the Scheme of Administration read with the order of Joint Director dated 20th February, 2016, the proceedings of election were required to have been got conducted by the authorized controller and the course adopted by the authorities to have elections conducted by the respondent No.4, who is not the authorized controller, is illegal.
(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that election ought to be conducted at the earliest so that valid Committee of Management is constituted.;