COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT AUDYOGIK VIKAS UCHCHATTAR MADHYAMIK VIDYALAYA SAMITI Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY BASTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the town; of Maharajganj within the district of Basti there is a registered society named and styled as Audyogik Vikas Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Samiti which runs a college under the name and style of Audyogik Vikas INter College. IN May, 1956 both Siyaram Singh, the appellant no. 2, and Ambika Prasad Singh, the respondent no. 3 herein, set up rival claims as Secretary-cum-Manager of the society contending that they had been so appointed in the meetings of the Society held on May 18, and May 25, 1986 respectively and each of them requested the Assistant Registrar of Societies for renewal of registration of the Society in his favour. The said Registrar referred the dispute to the Prescribed Authority (Sub-Divisional Magistrate), Harriya to decide the matter in accordance with section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. ('Act' for short), and the latter decided the dispute in favour of the appellant no. ? by an order dated 18 9-1990 Assailing that order the respondent no. 3 filed a writ petition before a learned Judge of this Court which was allowed and the order of the Prescribed Authority was set aside principally on the ground that the dispute which the Prescribed Authority was required to decide related to an election which was held in May, 1986 and on the date be passed the impugned order the term of the Committee of Management, and for that matter of the Secretary, elected either on 18-5- 1986 or on 25-5-1986 had expired tin accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration framed under the U. P. INtermediate Education Act, 1921 as its maximum life was three years and three months. Besides, the learned Judge noticed, an order had already been issued by the Deputy Director of Education to the District INspector of Schools to get fresh election conducted. The above judgment of the learned Judge is under challenge in the instant special appeal filed by the Committee of Management of the Society and Siyaram Singh.

(2.) IN challenging the above findings of the learned Judge, Dr. Padiya appearing for the appellants submitted that the learned Judge failed to consider that the Committee of Management of the Society as constituted under the Act and the Committee of Management of the College as constituted under the Scheme of Administration in accordance with section 16-A of the U. P. INtermediate Education Act, 1921, were two distinct and separate bodies and they function for the respective periods prescribed thereunder. IN elaborating his contention, Dr. Padiya urged that under the Act a Committee of Management of the Society had a minimum life of five years while under the Scheme of Administration the life of the Committee of Management for the College had maximum life of three years and three months. Consequently, Dr. Padiya submitted, the expiry of the term of the Committee of Management of the College after the period of three years and three months did not mean that the term of the Committee of Management of the Society also expired and in fact, according to Dr. Padiya, the Committee of Management of the Society in question continued to remain valid. On this score alone, according to Dr. Padiya, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside.

(3.) FOR the discussions aforesaid, we do not find any merit in this appeal and dismiss the same Appeal dismissed.