SANTOSH KUMARI KAPOOR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AUTHORISED Controller of Arya Kenya Pathshala Intermediate College, Mirzapur (herein after referred to as the college), who was appointed in 1976 by the Government of Uttar Pradesh under sub-section (4) of Section 16 D of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (herein after referred to as the Act), issued a notice dated 17-3-1992, for holding the election of the Committee of Management of the college on 31-3 -1992. Appellants challenged the above notice before this Court by means of writ petition No. 10211 of 1992 in which this Court passed an interim order on 31-3-1992 whereby the election of the Committee of Management was permitted to take place, but declaration of its result was stayed till further orders. Election of the Committee of Management is alleged to have been held on 31-3-1990 electing the office-bearers unanimously and the same day Its result is said to have been declared. On 10-4-1992 the Government of Uttar Pradesh passed an order under Second proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 16-D of the Act. directing; the AUTHORISED Controller to hand over the control of the college to Sri Mohan Singh, newly elected Manager. Appellants filed second writ petition no. 11952 of 1992 against the above order dated 10-4-1992, in which this Court on 15-4-1992 passed the following interim order : "Respondents are restrained from giving effect to the election of the Committee of Management held on 31-3-1992. In case District Inspector of Schools has granted recognition to the Manager on the basis of the election held on 31-3-1992, he is restrained from functioning as Manager of the institution. It is further directed that in the meantime the respondent no. 5 would manage the affairs of the institution. Respondent no. 5 who was required to manage the affairs of the institution, is the Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools, Varanasi Region.

(2.) LEARNED Judge although dismissed both the writ petitions on 13-11-1992 on the ground that they involve disputed questions of facts, which cannot be decided under Article 226 oft the Constitution, but permitted the the appellants to make detailed representation containing all her pleas to the Deputy Director of Education, who will decide the same, after giving opportunity of hearing to the appellants and newly elected Committee of Management, bypassing a speaking order. It was further observed that the Deputy Director will also decide the question as to whether the election has been held in accordance with the Scheme of Administration. Against the above judgment the appellants have filed two Special Appeals.

(3.) UNDER Sub-section (4) of Section 16-D of the Act the State Government has been empowered to appoint an authorised Controller for an educational Institution for such period not exceeding two years. UNDER the first proviso to the above sub-section this period of two years can be extended from time to time for such period not exceeding one year at a time, so however, that total period of operation of the order does not exceed five years. UNDER Second proviso, the Government has the authority to permit the Authorised Controller to continue even after expiry of five years until it is satisfied that the Committee of Management has been lawfully constituted. This proviso, which is relevant, is reproduced below : - "Provided further that if at the expiration of the said period of five years, there is no lawfully constituted Committee of Management of the institution, the Authorised Controller shall continue to function as such, until the State Government is satisfied that a Committee of Management has been lawfully constituted.'