D.P. Mohapatra, .J. - (1.) MAHARSHI Durbasa Inter College, Kakra Dubewal, Allahabad is a recognised Intermediate College the affairs of which are governed by a Committee of Management constituted in accordance with the Scheme of Administration approved under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 way back in 1964. The question that arises for consideration in this Special Appeal directed against the judgment and order dated 8.5.1996 passed by a learned single Judge is as to whether the office bearers of the out -going Committee of Management of the College were competent to organise, conduct and hold the election of the Committee of Management in accordance with the Scheme of Administration even after expiry of the term of the Committee of Management.
(2.) MINIMAL facts necessary to unfold the controversy and appreciate the question raised herein may be stated as thus : The first Respondent Satya Deo Tewari who was the president in the out -going Committee of Management filed the writ petition giving rise to this appeal praying for the relief of mandamus commanding the Deputy Director of Education and the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad arrayed as party Respondents No. 1 and 2 respectively in the writ petition to appoint a Prabandh Sanchalak for managing the affairs of the College and holding election of its Committee of Management. It was alleged in the writ petition that the term of the Committee of Management constituted on the basis of election held on 27.12.1981 expired on 27.12.1984 but no election was held thereafter for reconstituting the Committee the term of which expired in December, 1984. It was further alleged that the Scheme of Administration of the College initially approved on September 5, 1964 had not been amended and, according to the said Scheme of Administration, the office bearers of the outgoing Committee of Management were to continue until replaced by their successors. It was further alleged that Sri Kant Mishra, who was elected Manager in 1981 continued in office by taking advantage of clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration which provided that the term of the office bearers would be deemed to be continuing even after expiry of the term of the Committee of Management until their successors were elected. The writ Petitioner - -Satya Deo Tewari further alleged that the outgoing Committee of Management had no right to hold election after expiry of its three -year term and one month thereafter. In the counter -affidavit filed on behalf of the Committee of Management by its Manager Sri Kant Mishra, it has been averred that a dispute came to be raised in respect of the election held in 1981 which was ultimately decided by the Deputy Director of Education, Allahabad in the year 1983 upholding the validity of the Committee of Management of which he was elected Manager in 1981 and the said Committee of Management continued for a period of three years as per the decision of the Deputy Director of Education and thereafter the elections were held on due dates in 1987 and 1990. The next election which was due in 1993 could not be held because the writ Petitioner - -Satya Deo Tewari had raised a dispute before the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits which the latter referred to the Prescribed Authority under Section 25 of Societies Registration Act, 1860 who decided the dispute, vide order dated 6.10.1995, in favour of the Appellant and thereafter the District Inspector of Schools was approached vide letter dated 28.11.1995, with a request to appoint an observer so that the election of the Managing Committee could be held according to law. To complete the chain of events, it may be stated that the election of the Committee of Management was held during the pendency of the writ petition on 11.2.1996 under the supervision of the Associate District Inspector of Schools who was appointed observer by the District Inspector of Schools and in the said election, Sri Kant Mishra was reelected Manager and Sri Vidya Dhar Tewari President of the Managing Committee which came to be recognised by the District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 22.2.1996 and, therefore, an application dated 6.5.1996 supported with an affidavit annexing thereto the order dated 22.2.1996 and certain other documents was filed on behalf of the Appellant. The writ Petitioner, however, did not get his petition amended so as to question the validity of the election dated 11.2.1996 and the order dated 22.2.1996. Learned single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Director of Education who was not even arrayed as party Respondent to the writ petition to appoint Prabandh Sanchalak within a period of one month and the Prabandh Sanchalak so appointed, would hold election of the Committee of Management within a period of three months and hand over charge to the duly elected Committee of Management. Learned single Judge was of the opinion that the election of the Committee of Management could not have been held during the pendency of the writ petition "without permission of the Court". Learned single Judge was also of the view that even though the Scheme of Administration had not been amended, the election could only be held under the supervision of an authority appointed by the Deputy Director of Education and further that the election held by the office bearers of the out -going Committee of Management "was without authority and the Education Authorities could not recognise the same".
(3.) WE have heard Sri K. R. Sirohi for the Appellant, Sri Uma Kant for the first Respondent and learned standing counsel of the Respondents No. 2 and 3. In our considered view, the judgment of the learned single Judge cannot be sustained and the appeal deserves to be allotted for the reasons herein given. The petition was presented in the Registry of the Court on 5.12.1995 and it came up before the appropriate single Judge Bench on 6.12.1995 but on the request made on behalf of the counsel for caveator, it was adjourned to the next following day, i.e., 7.12.1995 on which date the matter was adjourned to 8.1.1996 with a view to enabling the parties to exchange counter and rejoinder affidavits. No interim relief was given even though an application for ad -interim injunction restraining the Appellant herein from functioning as Manager of the College was moved along with the writ petition. The writ petition came to be heard and finally disposed of vide judgment and order dated 8.5.1996. Sri Kant Mishra the Manager in the outgoing Committee of Management continued to function as such without any demur from the relevant authorities under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and neither Authorised Controller nor Prabandh Sanchalak was appointed in relation to the College in question even though, according to the Petitioner, no periodical election was held for the constitution of the Committee of Management after 1981. Indeed the counsel for the parties could not invite our attention to any provision either in the Act or in the approved Scheme of Administration providing for appointment of Controller or Prabandh Sanchalak on the failure of the office bearers of the out -going Committee of Management to hold election before expiry of its three -years term or within a reasonable time thereafter. We are of the considered view that mere pendency of the writ petition could not inhibit the office bearers of the outgoing Committee of Management to convene an election meeting of the General Body and get the office bearers and members of the Committee of Management elected in accordance with the Scheme of Administration and the election cannot be invalidated merely because it was held during the pendency of the writ petition. As a matter of fact, the election held pending writ petition and its recognition by the District Inspector of Schools were not at issue in the writ petition in that the Petitioner took no steps to get his petition suitably amended.;