U.P. Intermediate Education Act | Regional Level Committee’s Decision On Validity Of Election Of Committee Of Management Is Not Final & Is Subject To Court Orders: Allahabad HC
The Allahabad High Court observed that the decision of the Regional Level Committee on the validity of the election of a committee of school management is not final and is subject to orders of the Court.
The Court said that while exercising its power under Section 16-A(7) of the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 the Regional Level Committee only enquires as to whether the parties claiming elections of the Committee of Management or its office bearers are not rank trespassers trying to take over the Committee of Management.
The bench of Justice Salil Kumar Rai observed, “While deciding any dispute regarding elections of the Committee of Management, the Regional Level Committee only, prima facie, decides the validity of the elections. While exercising its power under Section 16-A(7), the Regional Level Committee only enquires as to whether the parties claiming elections of the Committee of Management or its office bearers are not rank trespassers trying to take over the Committee of Management. The Regional Level Committee does not decide the validity of the elections as a court. The order of the Regional Level Committee is not final and is subject to orders passed by a court.”
Advocate Rahul Sahai appeared for the Appellant and C.S.C. Namit Srivastava appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts-
Shri Shanker Vidyalaya Shiksha Samiti, a registered society under the Societies Registration Act of 1860, runs Shri Shanker Inter College in Mathura which is governed by the Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921. It is included in the state's grant-in-aid list. The dispute at hand concerns rival elections for the Committee of Management dating back to 2003, with two factions claiming the position of Manager. The Petitioner, who was declared the elected Manager following the elections, saw his claim rejected by the Regional Level Committee, which ruled that the elections were invalid as they did not adhere to a previous Court order. The Committee also noted the failure to comply with the proper procedure for registering the members of the society. Consequently, an Authorised Controller was appointed to manage the institution’s affairs. Present Writ Petition challenged the decision in Court.
The Court noted that clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration only enables the Regional Joint Director of Education to appoint, on the recommendations of the D.I.O.S., an Authorised Controller in the Institution. According to the Court, the D.I.O.S. doesn't need to recommend to the Joint Director for appointment of an Authorised Controller and it is also not obligatory for the Joint Director to appoint an Authorized Controller if such a recommendation is made by the D.I.O.S.
The Court further noted that if an Authorized Controller is appointed under Clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration, it is only he who would have the power to hold the elections of the Committee of Management of the Institution and its office bearers. An Authorized Controller not appointed under Clause 7, but otherwise, will not be empowered to hold the elections and any elections held by such an Authorized Controller would violate the Scheme of Administration.
The Court observed, “the Committee of Management whose term has expired is not prohibited from holding elections to constitute a fresh Committee of Management if no Authorized Controller has been appointed under clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration.”
The Court said that the Authorized Controller functioning in the Institution was not empowered to hold the elections, and the elections held by the petitioners can not be invalidated merely on the ground that the term of the Committee of Management which held the elections, had expired.
The Court said that the elections of a Committee of Management of an Institution governed by Act, 1921 are not held by the Assistant Registrar under Section 25(2) of the Act, 1860 and any such elections would be contrary to the Scheme of Administration and illegal.
Accordingly, the Court said that the order of the Regional Level Committee rejecting the elections set up by the petitioner is contrary to law.
Finally, the Court allowed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title: C/M Shri Shanker Inter College And Another v. State of U.P. (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC:135567)
Appearance:
Appellant: Adv. Rahul Sahai and Adv. Saumitra Anand
Respondent: C.S.C.Namit Srivastava, Adv. Parul Srivastava and Adv. Prabhakar Awasthi