COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT MAHARASHI RAVIDAS INTER COL­LEGE, SITAPUR AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the appellant Sri G.C. Verma and Sri Lakshman Singh for the respondents Nos. 8 and 9. This special appeal challenges the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 4.5.2010, by means of which the order of attestation of signatures of appellant No. 2 as Manager of the Institution made by the District Inspector of Schools on 11.10.2009 has been set aside and a further direction has been issued while allowing the writ petition giving liberty to the District Inspector of Schools, respondent No. 4 to hold a fresh election on the basis of a valid list of members provided by the Deputy Registrar. In the meantime, it has been provided that the college shall function under the governance of the authorized controller appointed by the Regional Joint Director of Education.

(2.) At the outset, we feel our duty to observe that in the matter of administration of a public institution, governed by the statutory provisions of the Act, Rules or Regulations, which specifically provide the circumstance and conditions under which the authorized controller is to be appointed with designated authority to exercise his powers after following the due procedure, it would be in the rarest of rare case where the High Court will take the responsibility upon its own shoulders of appointing an authorized controller. The judicial review in the matter of appointment of authorized controller would be with regard to the facts prevailing in each and every case and of course of the procedure prescribed for the purpose. If the order passed is grossly illegal, irrational or arbitrary, the Court would interfere in the matter. The responsibility of good governance and strict discipline in educational institutions is of college management, principal and of course of the educational authorities, by whom the disciplinary and administrative powers under the Act are exercised.

(3.) In the instant case, simply because the learned Single Judge found that the elections were not held from a valid list of elected members on the basis of averments made by appellant No. 2 in the counter-affidavit, has not only set aside the election which was duly recognized by the District Inspector of Schools, but has also issued a direction for holding a fresh election on the basis of valid list of members provided by the Deputy Registrar. Since the elections were already held and the committee of management was in control of the affairs of the institution as a result of election held on 11.10.2009, therefore, for the interregnum period, the learned Single Judge has appointed the authorized controller.