B.L.Yadav - (1.) THIS is an application on behalf of the Authorised Controller, Sri Kashi Raj Mahavidyalaya, Aurin, District Varanasi, to vacate the interim stay dated 11-8-1988, directing respondent no. 5, the Authorised Controller, Sri Kashi Raj Mahavidyalaya, Aurin, District Varanasi, to hand over charge of the office of the Committee of Management, to petitioner no. 1, who was Secretary-cum-Manager and Sri Shambhu Nath Misra, petitioner no. 2, Principal of the institution, within six weeks, or to show cause.
(2.) CONSEQUENT upon that order, a counter affidavit has been filed showing cause, and in para 9 of the counter affidavit filed by Sri Virendra Pratap, Principal of the College, it has been disclosed that the term of the Authorised Controller can be extended even beyond five years. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that in view of Section 16-D (4) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, (for short the Act), it is obvious that the maximum period for which the Authorised Controller could be ordered to operate or to handle the affairs of the institution, is five years. Hence beyond five years the Authorised Controller has no power to continue as such. In the present case, vide Annexure-1 to the petition, it appears that the Authorised Controller is continuing since 4-10-1977, i.e. for the last about 12 years. Learned Standing Counsel on the other hand, urged that the Authorised Controller is to continue as stated in para 9 of the Counter affidavit, as the irregularities in the institution have not been corrected.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that as the statutory requirement of Section 16-D (4) read with First Proviso added thereto, is that the maximum period for Authorised Controller is for five years. This period could be in the initial stage for two years as provided under Section 16-D (4 . Thereafter the proviso, which is to create exception, the period is for one year which may be extended at a time. However, the total period should not be beyond five years. In the Second Proviso to Section 16-D (4) of the Act, it has been provided that even though beyond five years the term of the Authorised Controller could be extended, but that would be only when the State Government is satisfied that the Committee of Management has not been lawfully constituted. In the counter affidavit there is no such averment that the Committee of Management was not lawfully constituted. In para 11 of the counter affidavit it has been stated that the petitioner's Committee of Management is not in effective control.;