- (1.) S. R. Singh. J. Both these petitions arise out of the order dated 25. 11. 1995 passed by the Deputy Director of Educa tion, 1st Region, Meerut in purported com pliance of the judgment and order dated 11. 1. 1995 of the High Court in writ petition No. 903 of 995. The petitioner- committee of management in one petition is the con testing respondent in the other. The dispute between the parties, in Writ Petition No. 36148 of 1995 pertains of the validity of the committee of management constituted on the basis of election held on 10. 7. 1994 and recognised by the District Inspector of Schools vide order dated 8. 12. 1994 and the question involved in the other writ petition is whether the scheme of Administration of the College stood amended as proposed vide resolution dated 21. 3. 1994 passed by the out-going committee of management in pursuance of direction contained in the let ter, dated 4. 2. 1994 issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education and the nega tive view of the question expressed in the impugned order is erroneous.
(2.) MINIMAL facts necessary to highlight the controversy and to appreciate the ques tions herein involved may be stated as below: (a) Janta Inter College, Bhopa, Muzaffar-nagar is a recognised institution governed by the provisions of U. P. Intermediate Education Act. , 1921 ( here in after referred to as 'the Act') The college has its own Scheme of Administration as approved under Section 16-Aof the Act and other related provisions there of including the IIIrd Schedule, the Scheme of Administration provides for constitution of committee of management by periodical elections and it is the committee of management so constituted periodically that is vested with the authority to manage the affairs is of the institution. (b) The Scheme of Administration as ap proved by the Deputy Director of Education visualised three- year term for the committee of management constituted in accordance with the Scheme with a further stipulation that the office bearers of the committee of management would be entitled to continue for a period of one month next after expiration of its three-year term and if during this period a new committee of manage ment is not constituted, the term of the out-going committee of management would automatically come to an end by efflux of time and a Prabandh Sanchalak appointed by Regional Deputy Direc tor of Education would, thereafter, take over the management of the College. (c) The committee of management which was constituted on the basis of the election held on 24. 3. 1991 received its approval recognition by the District Inspector of Schools on 27. 3. 1991. Its three-year term came to an end on 26. 3. 1994. But before expiration of its term, it had initiated the process of election on 11. 2. 1994 for constitution of new committee of management and had in fact fixed 17. 4. 1994 for filing nominations and 24. 4. 1994 for poll, if necessary. However, it so happened that no nomination papers were received on the scheduled date i. e. 17. 4. 1994 and the Election Officer rejected the nomination papers which were received after due date. Conse quently due to force majeure constitution of the new committee of management could not take place with in the stipulated period but no one was appointed as Prabandh Sanchalak to take over the management of the institution and the out-going committee was not only allowed to manage and conduct the affairs of the College but permitted by the District Inspector of Schools to hold the elec tion on 10. 7. 1994 as per revised schedule in presence of the observer sent by him and the District Administration. The submission made by Sri VM. Zaidi, counsel appearing for petitioners in writ petition No. 36146of 1995 ( here in after called PI) is that the out-going committee of management had no authority to hold the election and the committee of management constituted as a result of the election or ganised by the outgoing committee of management and held on 10. 7. 1994 is liable to be invalidated. In other words Sri Zaidi urged that the business transacted in the meeting of the general body held on 10. 7. 1994 was liable to be invalidated as the meeting was called by the office bearers of the out-going committee of management whose term had already expired. Sri R. N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner in writ petition No. 2931 of 1996 (in short P2) urged, on the other hand, that the out-going committee of management had every authority to organise and hold election of new committee of management with in three years and six months of its term pursuant to Scheme of Administration as it stood amended vide resolution dated 21. 3. 1994 passed by the committee of management in compliance with the general direction is sued by the Deputy Director of Education 1st Region, Meerut vide letter dated 4. 2. 1994. In rejoinder Sri V. M. Zaidi urged that the proposed amendment of the Scheme of Administration providing for six months' extension in the terms of the com mittee of management with the assent of the Regional Deputy Director of Education and another six months with the assent of the Regional Additional Director of Education for the purpose of constitution of a new committee of management would not be deemed to have been brought about in that it was never approved by the Director of Education' nor was the Scheme actually amended on the basis of the resulution dated 21. 3. 1994. Haven giving my anxious considera tion to the submissions made at the Bar, I am of the considered view that albeit resulation No. 3 passed by the Committee of management in its meeting held on 21. 3. 1994 proposing aforesaid amendment in paragraph 8 of the Scheme of Ad ministration was fairly well in tune with the general directions issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education vide letter dated 4. 2. 1994 but no amendment was ac tually made in the Scheme of Administra tion pursuant to the said resolution nor could it be made unless approved by the Director of Education in that sub-section (5) of Section 16-A of the Act clearly provides that 'no amendment to or change in the Scheme of Administration shall be made at any time without prior approval of the Director. ' The word "director" as defined in Section 2 (aaa) of the Act includes, for the purpose of Section 3, Additional Director and is quite distinct from the Regional Deputy Director of Education"- a term defined in Section 2 (dd) of the Act. The argument that prior approval of the Direc tor of Education would not be necessary in the instant case in as much as the amend ment was sought to be made by the commit tee of management on the basis of general directions issued by the Regional Deputy Director of Education' vide letter dated 4. 2. 1994 is quite off the mark and cannot be countenanced for the simple reason that any change or alteration in the Scheme of Administration requires prior approval of the Director of Education and not of the Regional Director of Education. " Had the amendment been made pursuant to any direction issued by the "director of Education" the position would have been different. There is neither any allegation nor any proof of the fact that the proposed amendment was ever sent to the Director of Education". That apart the amendment as proposed vide resolution No. 3 dated 1. 3. 1994 does not appear to have been in corporated in the Scheme of Administra tion and, therefore, the resolution is of no avail to P2 and the Regional Deputy Direc tor of Education was right in holding that in the absence of prior approval by the Direc tor of Education the Scheme could not have been amended.
(3.) NEXT question that arise for con sideration is whether the constitution of the committee of management as a result of election held on 10. 7. 1994 is liable to be invalidated for the reason that the election was organised and held by the out-going committee of management after expiration of its term. In other words the question is whether the business transacted in the meeting of the general body of the institu tion held on 10. 7. 1994 was validly trans acted the business would be said to have been validly transacted, if the members of the general body, whether or not they were present, are held bound by the decision taken at the meeting. In my opinion, they would be so bound if the meeting was validly held and the decision taken thereat does not violate any express or implied mandate of the Act or the Regulations made there under impinging upon the resulf of the elec tion. Essentials of a valid meeting are that it should be:- (a)properly convened i. e. proper notice must be sent by the appropriate authority, to every person entitled to attend the meet ing; (b) property constituted i. e. proper per son must be in the chair; the Rules as to quorum must be observed and the Regula tions governing the meeting must be com plied with; and (c) properly conducted i. e. Chairman must conduct that proceedings in accord ance with the Regulations governing the meeting (See Company Meetings-Law and Procedure by B. K. Sen Gupta-page (5 ). It is no body's case that persons entitled to at tend the meetings did not have notice there of. But what is implicit in the submission of Sri Zaidi as to invalidity of the election dated 10. 7. 1994 is that the persons conven ing the meeting, giving notices thereof to the members and presiding and conductiing the same had lost their authority to do so due to the reason that their term of office had already expired before 10. 7. 1994 by ef flux of time. I am of the view that prescrip tion of one month period next after expira tion of the three- year term for the constitu tion of new committee of management only means that the frame of the Scheme though it to be reasonable for the out-going com mittee of managment to compele the process of election within its extended term. It does not mean that election, the process of which had already commenced, would be vitiated merely because the process cul minated in its completion after the stipu lated period of three years and one month. The language employed in the scheme does not support the contention of Sri Zaidi. The stipulation that the management of the in stitution would be taken over by a person appointed as Prabandh Sanchalak in the event of failure to constitute the committee of management within the stipuleted period is suggestive of the fact that tne com mittee would not automatically cease to be functional. In other words it would continue to be funtional untill replaced by Prabandh Sanchalak. In Chetram Vashist v. Municipal Cor poration of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 653, it was held that where a provision fixes a time within which a public offficer or authority has to act in performance of the duty, it generally means that the statute considers it reasonable for the officer or authority to act within stich period.;