D.P.Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel and Shri K. Sahi for the respondent No. 5.
(2.) BACHCHAN Singh Tomar Uchchattar Madyamik Vidyalaya in Etawah is a duly recognised and aided institution and is managed by a Committee of Management duly elected according to the scheme of administration. In the elections held in 1996 the petitioner Committee of Management was elected and Shri Parimal Singh Tomar was elected as Manager whose signature was also duly attested on 21.8.1996. One H.S. Tomar challenged the said recognition through Writ Petition No. 33476 of 1996 which was dismissed on 7.10.1996 allowing him to approach the Deputy Director of Education. Nevertheless, he approached the District Inspector of Schools instead who vide order dated 22.10.1996 recalled the attestation order dated 21.8.1996 and attested the signature of the said Shri H.S. Tomar. Meanwhile, the Deputy Director of Education, in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 7.10.1996 passed an order on 2.6.1998 holding that the petitioner's Committee of Management was the legally elected Committee of Management and that Shri H.S. Tomar was not entitled even to hold any post in the Committee of Management and the signatures of Parimal Singh Tomar were again attested. On eve of the expiry of the period, fresh election was held and papers were sent to the authorities who vide order dated 2.9.1997 again attested the signatures of Shri Parimal Singh Tomar. But yet again the order was reviewed and signature of Shri H.S. Tomar was attested forcing the petitioner to file Writ Petition No. 81 of 2000 and this Court stayed the order passed in favour of Shri H.S. Tomar on 4.1.2000. Fresh elections having become due were held in August, 2002 and the papers were sent for recognition and when no action was forthcoming the petitioner approached this Court through Writ Petition No. 3940 of 2002 when the authorities were directed to take a decision on the election of the petitioner within 15 days and till then the petitioner was allowed to continue as the Committee of Management. However, vide order dated 28.10.2002 the election of the petitioner was held to be illegal and committee of respondent No. 5 was recognised which was subjected to challenge in Writ Petition No. 49110 of 2002. After perusal of the record, the writ petition was allowed and the order dated 28.10.2002 was quashed and the matter was remanded to the Joint Director of Education, Kanpur to decide the matter afresh keeping in mind that only the outgoing Manager is entitled to hold the elections but no action was taken for more than two months and the respondent No. 5 was allowed to continue and subsequently on 7.10.2003 it was held that the Committee of Management of respondent No. 5 was duly elected. Apparently, this order ignored the observations made in the judgment of this Court dated 28.4.2003 forcing the petitioner to file yet another Writ Petition No. 50071 of 2003 where the order of the Joint Director of Education dated 7.10.2003 was again stayed. Nevertheless, the respondent No. 5 claimed a fresh election on 17.5.2005 and the Regional Committee approved his elections vide order dated 20.7.2005, but the copy was not supplied to the petitioner forcing him to file yet another Writ Petition No. 66425 of 2005 wherein a direction was issued to the District Inspector of Schools to be present in Court alongwith the records and whereupon the petitioner was permitted to inspect the records in Court and consequently he challenged the three orders dated 20.7.2005,13.9.2005 and 23.9.2005 by which the elections of respondent No. 5 was recognised and all the three orders were stayed by the Court on 14.2.2006. The elections having become due were held by the petitioner on 18.8.2008 and papers were submitted on 6.9.2008 but the District Inspector of Schools again claiming election dispute referred the matter to the Regional Committee but no decision was taken forcing the petitioner to file the present writ petition challenging the order dated 20.9.2008 by which all the papers were sent to the Regional Committee claiming dispute in elections. Entertaining this writ petition the following order was passed on 15.10.2008: "Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. Before notice is issued to the respondent Nos. 4 and 5, it would be appropriate that the record of the Regional Level Committee should be perused. Accordingly, the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur shall appear before this Court alongwith the entire records of this case on the next date. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned Chief Standing Counsel within 48 hours. List on 12.11,2008."
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY, when the matter was taken up on 27.8.2009 the following order was passed: "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel. The dispute as spoused in this petition has a long drawn and chequered history where one after the other order was passed in violation of the positive direction of this Court, but the same was stayed when challenged before it. By an order dated 15th October 2008, the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur was directed to appear alongwith the entire records. This order was subjected to Special Appeal No. 807 of 2008 by the respondent No. 5 to whom even notices were not issued as the Court was of the opinion that before issuing notice to him, the record should be perused. However, the said special appeal was dismissed on 3rd November 2009. The record is here. However, without the presence of the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur, the record can neither be explained nor gone through and the doubts in the mind of the Court cannot be cleared. Accordingly, let the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur appear in Court for the aforesaid purposes. Let a copy of this order be given to Sri Ravi Ranjan,' learned Standing counsel within 48 hours. List on 3rd of September 2009." In pursuance thereof, the Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur is present along with the record.;