COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT OF NALDEO KULDEO INTERMEDIATE COLLEGE Vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION VTH REGION VARANASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN 1979 the Government appointed an authorised controller under Section 16D of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for Naldeo Kuldeo Inter College, Jaunpur (hereinafter referred to as the college). The authorised controller continued to manage the college till 1989. The Government of U.P. by its order dated January 24, 1990 revoked the appointment of authorised controller in view of the election of the Committee of Management (Petitioner) of which Petitioner no 2 was the manager, and accordingly directed for handing over the charge and control of the college to that Committee. The charge of the college was accordingly handed over to the Petitioners and signatures of the Petitioner no. 2 as manager were attested. The Petitioners thereafter continued to manage the college. However, the Deputy Director of Education vide his order dated 26 -6 -1992 (Annexure -7 to the writ petition), declared the election of the petitioners' Committee held in 1989 as illegal and appointed an administrator for running and managing the college. It is against this order that the Petitioners have filed this writ petition.

(2.) A counter affidavit sworn by Sri Sharda Prasad Singh, claiming to be elected manager of the college, has been filed and the Petitioner has filed rejoinder -affidavit in reply thereto. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

(3.) PROVISIONS of Section 16 -A (7) of the Intermediate Education Act are attracted when the dispute regarding the right to manage the college is raised by two or more Committees of Management. Unless there are two or more rival managing committees laying their claim to manage the college the Deputy Director of Education does not get jurisdiction under the above provisions to decide the dispute. In this connection reference may be made to the decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Committee of Management v. District Inspector of Schools, 1992 ACJ 505 in which it was laid down as follows :