Committee of Management vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others

Rakesh Tiwari, J.

Heard Counsel for the petitioner, Standing Counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Irshad Ali who has accepted notice on behalf of respondent No. 4 and perused the record.

Late Shri Jitawar Singh Senger Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Harvanshpur, District Auraiya (then District Etawah) is a Society registered under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860. On the death of erstwhile Manager Sri Shiv Ram Singh a meeting of the general body was held on 1.2.2009 under the Presidentship of Smt. Munni Devi for handing over the charge of Manager of the Society of the remained period of Rajendra Singh Senger.

The petitioner who claims himself to be Manager of the petitioner Committee of Management, has filed the present writ petition inter alia is that he nas been given the charge of the Manager for the remaining period of Committee of Management till next elections are held but by the impugned order, the respondent No. 3, District Basic Education Officer, Auraiya has attested the signatures of Sri Sobaran Singh, respondent No. 4.

Sri Irshad Ali, Counsel for respondent No. 4 submits that this writ petition has been filed by concealment of fact. He does not dispute that the petitioner had been entrusted to work as Manager but vide resolution dated 5th February, 2009 the respondent No. 4 had been elected as Manager in place of Late Shri Ram Singh for the remaining term. He has produced a copy of the resolution dated 5th February, 2009 which shows that respondent No. 4 had been elected as Manager.

Shri Irshad Ali learned Counsel for respondent has relied upon a Division Bench decision rendered in the case of Committee of Management, Sri Pyare lal Shastri Junior High School, Jajau via Fatehpur Sikri, District Agra and another v. Basic Shiksha Adhikari and others, reported in 1990 (2) Vol. (XX) AWC 779, wherein it has been held that the order of the District Basic Education Officer recognizing President and Manager of the institution is an administrative order which may not be interfered with under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and that appropriate remedy available to the party aggrieved is to get. his rights adjudicated upon by a competent Civil Court.

The petitioner claim to have been given charge of the Manager vide resolution dated 5th February, 2009 whereas the respondent No. 4 claims that he has been elected by the members of the general body vide resolution dated 5th February, 2009 and his signatures as Manager have been attested by the Basic Education Officer, Auraiya. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the Basic Education Officer has passed impugned order without affording opportunity of hearing and his representation in this regard is already pending.

In my opinion, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Basic Education Officer he may get his grievance adjudicated upon by the Civil Courts. As regards, filing of representation is concerned, the same shall also be looked into civil suit.

In this view of the matter, this writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Petition dismissed.