SABHAJEET PANDEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PLEADINGS are complete and Counsels agree that it may be disposed off finally.

(2.) JANTA Junior High School, Anapur, Dashrathpur in District Jaunpur is a duly registered society. It runs an Intermediate College in the name and style of Dwarika Prasad Higher Secondary School, Jaunpur. The society and the institution have a common committee of management whose term, according to the scheme of administration, is three years. The last undisputed elections were held on 8 -8 -1993 wherein Mata Pradsad and Deotadeen Pandey were elected as President and Manager. The term of the aforesaid committee of management was to expire on 7 -9 -1996, therefore, the petitioner held the elections on 1 -9 -1996 wherein petitioner No. 2 Sabhajeet Pandey was elected as Manager and Raj Narain Mishra as President. While in another election held on 1 -9 -1999 Dewta Din was elected as Manager. The papers having been submitted by both the committees to the District Inspector of Schools, he referred the rival claims under Section 16 -A (7) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 to the Deputy Director of Education. The Deputy Director of Education by an order dated 15 -7 -1997 held that none of the two committees were validly elected and as such it appointed the District Inspector of Schools as the Prabandh Sanchalak for holding the elections of the new committee of management on the basis of the list of 121 members. This order was challenged in Writ Petition No. 24998 of 1997 by Devtadeen. Meanwhile, the committee headed by Sri Sabhajeet Pandey, petitioner No. 2, approached the Assistant Registrar, Chits, Societies and Firms which renewed the registration certificate in his favour and registered the name of the office bearers vide order dated 19 -1 -1998. This order of the Assistant Registrar was also subjected to challenge in writ petition No. 4267 of 1998.

(3.) IT appears that the election was held on 29 -12 -1998 on the basis of the list of 121 members, wherein petitioner No. 2 was elected as the manager. However, Sri Deotadeen Pandey held a separate election on 29 -12 -1998 on the strength of 60 members. It is then alleged that after expiry of the term of the committee of management fresh elections were held under the supervision of the Authorised Controller from the approved existing voter list of 121 members on 13 -11 -2002 in which against the petitioner No. 2 was elected as manager and the entire record was sent to the Joint Director, who vide order dated 15 -3 -2003 attested the signatures of petitioner No. 2, while the District Inspector of Schools also attested the signatures on 9 -4 -2003. However, vide order dated 16 -4 -2003, the District Inspector of Schools restrained the management and so also the Prabandh Sanchalak from administering the institution which was modified by an order dated 19 -4 -2003 permitting the Prabandh Sanchalak to manage the institution. The petitioner approached the Joint Director of Education complaining about the letter dated 16 -4 -2003 who vide his order dated 2 -5 -2003 sought an explanation from the District Inspector of Schools as to how such an order was passed inspite of the fact that the claim of the petitioner has been accepted by the Regional Committee on the recommendation of the District Inspector of Schools. This forced the District Inspector of Schools to pass an order dated 14 -7 -2003 again attesting the signature of the petitioner. It is alleged that on 8 -8 -2003 the petitioner was orally restrained by the District Inspector of Schools from functioning and when he complained to the Joint Director of Education, he was confronted with an order dated 23 -7 -2003 whereby he appointed a new Authorised Controller and he was also able to lay his hands on a consequential order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 24 -7 -2003. Both these orders are under challenge in Writ Petition No. 39207 of 2003. These orders were based on a order dated 1 -7 -2003 which the petitioner could not obtain. However, during the pendency of the petition, an amendment application incorporating the order dated 1 -7 -2003 has been allowed and the original order dated 1 -7 -2003 is also under challenge.