Committee of Management, Wesley Inter College, Azamgarh vs Director of Education (Secondary) and Others

Dilip Gupta, J.—The Committee of Management, Wesley Inter College, Azamgarh though its Manager E.G. Timothi has sought the quashing of the order dated 7th July, 2010 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Azamagarh by which he has granted recognition to the election of the Committee of Management of the Institution held on 20th June, 2010 with Navin Singh as the Manager.

It is pointed out by Sri A.D. Saunders, learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the Scheme of Administration of the Institution was amended and the Joint Director of Education by the order dated 22nd May, 1999 approved the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration. However, a letter dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 was received in the first week of October, 2006 from the Joint Director of Education that the aforesaid order approving the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration has been cancelled. This order was challenged by the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 66927 of 2006 which was partly allowed by the judgment and order dated 20th May, 2010. The order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 passed by the Joint Director of Education was set aside and the matter was remitted to the authority concerned to pass a fresh order, after giving opportunity to the parties, within two months. It is further stated by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that till date the Joint Director of Education has not decided the matter after remand by the High Court.

According to the Petitioner, the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution were held on 3rd June, 2010 and E.G. Timothi was again elected as the Manager. The proceedings were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools by the communication dated 14th June, 2010 but the District Inspector of Schools by the order dated 7th July, 2010 has approved another election of the Committee of Management of the Institution said to have been held on 20th June, 2010 with Naveen Singh as the Manager. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner that the order dated 7th July, 2010 passed by the District Inspector of Schools deserves to be set aside as not only does it fail to take into consideration the election of the Petitioner-Committee of Management held on 3rd June, 2010, but it does not record any finding as to whether the elections of the Respondent held on 20th June, 2010 were held on the basis of the amended Scheme of Administration or the unamended Scheme of Administration of the Institution. It is his submission that the elections held on 20th June, 2010, on which reliance has been placed by Respondent No. 4-Naveen Singh, were held on the basis of the unamended Scheme of Administration which was not permissible since the order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 by which the earlier order approving the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration of the Institution was set aside in the writ petition filed by the Petitioner and the matter is still engaging the attention of the Joint Director of Education.

Learned Standing Counsel appears for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 while Sri S.B. Singh and Sri Sunil Kumar Singh have put in appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 4 and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel has made submissions on behalf of Respondent No. 4. Learned Counsel for the Respondents have stated that it will not be necessary to file a counter affidavit and the petition may be disposed of at this stage.

It is the submission of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 that the Director of Education had passed the order dated 24th February, 2006 for canceling the order of the Joint Director of Education granting approval to the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration of the Institution, but by the the judgment and order dated 20th May, 2010 passed by the Court in Writ Petition No. 66927 of 2006 the petition was partly allowed and the order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 was only quashed. It is his submission that the order dated 24th February, 2006 passed by the Director of Education (Madhyamik) was not set aside and, therefore, the unamended Scheme of Administration continues to operate and the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution were validly held on 20th June, 2010 on the basis of the unamended Scheme of Administration of the Institution in the presence of the Observer appointed by the District Inspector of Schools and, therefore, no interference is called for. He further submitted that in fact the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution was earlier held on 8th December, 2009 in which Morris E. Dan was elected as the President and E.G. Timothi was elected as the Manager but in the meeting said to have been held on 3rd June, 2010 the resolution passed on 8th December, 2009 was cancelled which was not permissible in law.

I have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties.

It is not disputed that the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration of the Institution were approved by the Joint Director of Education by the order dated 22nd May, 1999. Subsequently, the Joint Director of Education by the order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 cancelled the earlier order dated 22nd May, 1999 and directed that the unamended Scheme of Administration shall continue to prevail. The Petitioner challenged the said order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 in Writ Petition No. 66927 of 2006 which was partly allowed by the judgment and order dated 20th May, 2010. The order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the authority concerned to pass a fresh order after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.

The Petitioner may have challenged the order dated 24th February, 2006 passed by the Director of Education in the said writ petition but a perusal of the said order indicates that only a direction was issued to the Joint Director of Education to take steps for cancellation of the order earlier granting approval. The Director of Education did not cancel the earlier approval granted by the Joint Director of Education and indeed he could not have done so as the jurisdiction to grant of approval to the Scheme of Administration of the Institution is with the Joint Director of Education. It is for this reason that the Joint Director of Education passed the order dated 26th June, 2006/28th August, 2006 for cancellation of the earlier approval granted to the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration of the Institution. It was, therefore, not necessary for the Court to quash the order dated 24th February, 2006 and, therefore, it is not possible to accept the submissions of Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 that the unamended Scheme of Administration of the Institution will continue to operate since the order dated 24th February, 2006 passed by the Director of Education has not been set aside by this Court.

It needs to be mentioned that Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4, on instructions received, has stated that the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution held on 20th June, 2010 in which Respondent No. 4-Naveen Singh was elected as the Manager was held on the basis of the unamended Scheme of Administration of the Institution. As noticed hereinabove, the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution are required to be held on the basis of the amended Scheme of Administration of the Institution so long as the Joint Director of Education does set aside the earlier order granting approval to the amendments made in the Scheme of Administration of the Institution after remand by the High Court.

In such circumstances, it is not possible to sustain the order dated 7th July, 2010 passed by the District Inspector of Schools. It is, accordingly, set aside. The District Inspector of Schools shall now examine the papers submitted by the Petitioner-Committee of Management regarding the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution held on 3rd June, 2010 and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is filed by the Petitioner before the District Inspector of Schools.

It is made clear that the quashing of the order dated 7th July, 2010 passed by the District Inspector of Schools at the instance of the Petitioner does not mean that this Court has approved the elections held on 3rd June, 2010 and it will be for the District Inspector of Schools to examine the papers and pass an appropriate order.

The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.