SALTANAT BAHADUR MAHAVIDYALAYA Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR PURVANCHAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ELECTIONS of the Committee of Management of Saltamat Bahadur Mahavidyalaya, Badlapur district jaunpur (hereinafter referred to as the college), were held on 10th January, 1988 The term of the Committee of Management being three years the elections were required to be held before the end of the term of the said Committee. The Committee of Management appointed a Returning Officer for conducting the election, who published the election programme In a local news paper. It appears that some objections were raised regarding right of some persons to vote in the election of the Committee and those objections were rejected by Returning Officer by his order dated 3-1-1991. The Returning Officer, thereafter, published a list of 309 members (trustees) of the General body who were to elect the Committee of Management. Respondents 2 to 4 made representation before the Vice-Chancellor of the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, to which the college is affiliated, against the above order of the Returning Officer whereby a list of 309 members was published. The Vice Chancellor stayed the holding of the election by an interim order. Thereafter by an order, copy of which has been filed as arraexure-18 to the writ petition, set-aside the order of Returning Officer and declared that only 160 old members (trustees) are entitled to vote in the election. Subsequent addition of 148 members (trustees) was declared as illegal with the result that those 148 new members cannot participate in the election. It is against this order that the writ petition no. 15379 of 1991 has been filed by the petitioners. Petitioner no. 1 is said to be registered society of the college whereas the petitioner no. 2 is its Committee of Management. Petitioner no?. 4 to 12 are the new trustees, whose names have been struck of from electoral roll by the Vice Chancellor by the impugned order. This court by interim order dated 29-5-1991 has permitted the election to be held in accordance with the impugned order of the Vice Chancellor.

(2.) AFTER the aforesaid order was passed by the Vice-Chancellor the Deputy Director of Education on July 13, 1992 passed an order under section 60-D of the State Universities Act, for single operation of the college account, by Lekhadhikari The second writ petition no. 26308 of 1992 has been filed against this order. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 15379) of 1991.

(3.) THAT apart there is no justification for any authority to interfere with the electoral process before the elections are over. Any matter which has the effect of vitiating elections should be brought up before the appropriate forum only after the election is over and should not be challenged at the intermediate stage. I have dealt with this aspect of the matter in the judgement in Writ Petition No. 25472 of 1991, Hridaya Narain Rai v. Deputy Director of Education, decided on 17-3-1992.