- (1.) Heard counsel for the petitioners, learned standing counsel for respondents no.1 and 4, brief holder of Sri Neeraj Tiwari for respondents no.2 and 3 and Sri Rahul Jain on behalf of respondent no.5. With their consent, this writ petition is being disposed of finally without inviting a formal counter affidavit.
(2.) Brahmanand Mahavidyalya, Rath district Hamirpur is an institution affiliated to Bundelkhand University, Jhansi. It is run by a society in the name of "the Managing Committee of the Brahma Nand Vidyalaya Degree College, Rath, district Hamirpur". The election of the committee of management of the institution was held in February, 2011 and was recognised by the Vice Chancellor on 17.3.2011 in exercise of power under Section 2 (13) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973. The order of recognition specifically mentions that the approval is being granted for a duration of three years, which is the tenure of the committee. It seems that thereafter, the President of the committee of management died and the vacancy, which came into existence, was filled up by co-option of one Chunni Lal Singh. The management sought approval in that regard from the Vice Chancellor. However, by communication dated 26.4.2014, the Registrar of the University informed the Principal of the institution that the term of the committee of management being three years, it came to an end on 24.2.2014 and thus, steps be taken for conducting fresh elections. It seems that thereafter, the management represented to the Vice Chancellor that there had been an amendment in the bye-laws, whereby the term of the committee came to be enlarged to five years. On the basis thereof, the Vice Chancellor accorded approval for extension of the term of the then management for a further period of two years until 24.2.2016 and the same was communicated by letter dated 4.6.2014. The petitioners alongwith one Dr. Gopinath Lodhi filed Writ Petition No.45286 of 2014 challenging the communication dated 4.6.2014. In the said writ petition, a counter affidavit was invited but no interim order was granted. The petitioners, thereafter, sought a Reference under Section 68 before the Vice Chancellor. The Vice Chancellor declined to entertain the Reference on the ground that a writ petition at the instance of the petitioners is already pending consideration before this Court. The management, whose term was extended, thus continued to manage the affairs of the institution. It had now notified an election schedule on 10.2.2016 for holding the elections of the committee of management. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant writ petition seeking quashing of the election schedule and for a mandamus commanding respondent no.3 and/or respondent no.4 to held fresh elections at its own level or through an independent person appointed by it after determining the valid members of the electoral college.
(3.) Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the fifth respondent, whose term came to be enlarged in pursuance of the communication dated 4.6.2014, is not entitled to conduct the elections. It is urged that the amendment in the bye-laws would not become effective unless the same is approved by the Vice Chancellor of the University and the said plea has not been adjudicated by any authority so far, although writ petition at the instance of the petitioners raising such plea is pending. It is submitted that the petitioners may be permitted to raise such plea before the Vice Chancellor at the time of grant of recognition to the elections that would be held in pursuance of the impugned notification.;