COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In first two writ petitions, validity of order dated 01.01.2005 passed by District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad, has been questioned by the Committee of Management, Hari Shyam Khadi Gramodyog Sewa Sabha, Malak Hamar, Allahabad. In Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 32327 of 2005, Ramesh Chandra Mishra has claimed himself to be the Manager, whereas in writ petition No. 1572 of 2005 Ravindra Kumar has claimed himself to be the Manager of the institution.

(2.) In the district of Allahabad on 23.09.1968 a society was registered in the name and style of Hari Shyam Khadi Gramodyog Sewa Sangh, Malak Harhar, Allahabad bearing registration No. 1-19147. The said society had established an institution up to Junior High School level known as Uttar Pradesh Balika Junior High School, Malak Harhar, Allahabad. Temporary recognition was accorded to the same on 08.02.1974 and permanent recognition was accorded to the same on 24.06.1976. One Asthbhuja Prasad Dubey had been performing and discharging duties as Manager/Secretary of the society as well as of the institution. On 06.01.1976 an order was passed on behalf of the Director of Education in exercise of power vested under paragraph 315 of the U.P. Education Code, whereby payment of grant through management was suspended and District Basic Education Officer (Manila) was authorised to disburse the salary from Government Fund to the approved teachers of the institution. Consequent to the said order being passed, consequential order dated 16.01.1976 was issued by Additional District Basic Shiksha Adhikari (Mahila). It has been contended that under the provisions of Societies Registration Act, 1860, an amendment was incorporated in the year 1975 making provision for periodical renewal of registration of society, and further the use of word 'Sangh' in the name of society was prohibited. On 31.03.1979 Asthabhuja Prasad Dubey filed an application before the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits seeking renewal of registration of the society. On the said application being moved, objections were raised by means of communication dated 23.04.1979 objecting to the use of word 'sangh' in the name of society, as such resolution was passed for substitution of word 'Sangh' by the word 'Sabha'. Thereafter papers were transmitted for renewal based on such amendments and renewal certificate was issued on 18.05.1979. It has been contended that said renewal has been renewed from time to time. It has been asserted that two teachers of the institution, namely Savitri Tiwari and Rani Shukla were terminated and then in well calculated design rival management under a rival society was got registered for the first time in the year 1978. The said registration was made on 18.12.1978, in the name of Hari Shyam Khadi Gram Udyog Sewa Samiti with registration No. 4849/78-79 by the Committee of Management with Ravindra Nath Mishra as Manager and Krisha Narain Upadhyaya as Deputy Manager. It has been contended that said society registered on 18.12.1978 was totally unconnected with earlier society Hari Shyam Khadi Gram Udyog Sewa Sangh and the institution run by it in the name of U.P. Balika Vidyalaya Junior High School, Malak Harhar, Allahabad. Petitioner has contended that in spite of the fact that they had no concern with the management of Junior High School, original suit No. 555 of 1978 had been filed in the court of Munsif (East) Allahabad. The said suit was filed for permanent injunction not to interfere with the administration and possession of the plaintiffs and also for quashing of three orders dated 13.03.1978, 07.06.1978 and 21.07.1978. Reference has also been given of one affidavit filed by Ravindra Nath Mishra filed in response to the counter affidavit of Smt. Rita Rai, paragraph 3. wherein It has been mentioned by Ravindra Nath Mishra that he was not the Secretary/Manager of the institution of which Smt. Reeta Rai alleged herself to be the Head Mistress. Details of orders dated 13.03.1978, 07.06.1978 and 21.07.1978 have been mentioned. Reference has also been given of written statement filed by Awadhesh Chandra Chatrurvedi, the Additional Director of Education (Secondary), U.P. Allahabad, disowning the version of Ravindra Nath Mishra, and also the affidavit filed by Kamla Devi, Additional District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad. Details have been given qua dismissal of original suit No. 555 of 1978 by 1st Additional Munsif, Allahabad. It has been contended that said judgment has attained finality, as it has not been questioned or appealed. Details have been given of the directives issued for running institution in Kachcha Bhavan and the communication dated 30.08.1979 issued by the Director of Education and the communication dated 24.01.1981 issued Additional Basic Shiksha Adhikari. It has been contended that in compliance with the aforesaid order institution has been run and managed in the premises referred to in the said order. Reference has also been given of another suit being suit No. 100 of 1981 filed by Ravindra Nath Mishra for injunction for release of grant and payment of salary to teachers claimed to be regularised by the plaintiff of the suit alone. The said claim was refuted by the Educational Authorities by filing written statement. Original suit No. 100 of 1981 has been dismissed by judgment dated 06.02.1984. It has been stated that the grant of the institution had been directed in the year 1976 to be disbursed through the District Basic Education Officer and not to be released in favour of management. Aggrieved by indefinite continuance of the aforesaid order of single operation, writ petition No. 5368 of 1981 was filed before this Court, and this Court dismissed the aforesaid writ petition with observation to represent the matter before Director of Education which was required to be considered and decided along with the claim of Asthbhuja Prasad Dubey to function as Manager. Pursuant to the said judgment dated 13.01.1988 representation is alleged to have been made, but no action was taken, then fresh writ petition was filed in the year 1989 and directives were issued by Division Bench of this Court on 18.01.1989 to decide the matter. Pursuant thereto, District Basic Education Officer proceeded to pass order dated 06.02.1989 to the effect that there existed dispute as to which particular society was managing the affairs of Junior High School and proceeded to pass order that competent authority to decide such dispute was Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits under Societies Registration Act, 1860 and made queries from the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits as to which society was the real society. On 28.08.1989, the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits passed an order mentioning therein that both the societies have got their separate managing committee, there is difference of name, as such both had valid registration and dispute was decided accordingly. Pursuant to order passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, the District Basic Education Officer proceeded to pass order on 19.09.1989 recognizing the Committee of Management headed by Ravindra Nath Mishra as Manager. The said order was followed by order dated 28.08.1990 passed by the Director of Education. The orders dated 19.09.1989 and 20.08.1990 were challenged by Asthabhuja Prasad Dubey by filing writ petition No. 20957 of 1990, which was decided by judgment dated 21.09.1993 and the orders dated 19.09.1989 and 20.08.1990 were quashed, and it was mentioned that on summary basis District Basic Education Officer is to decide as to who is entitled to manage the affairs of the institution as well as who is in effective control. Again thereafter pursuant to judgment dated 21.09.1993, District Basic Education Officer, Allahabad passed order dated 10.01.1994 recognizing the Committee of Management headed by Ravindra Nath Mishra on the footing that he was the Secretary of Hari Shyam Khadi Gram Udyog Sewa Samiti, Malak Harhar Allahabad. Said order was subject matter of challenge in writ petition No. 8577 of 1994 before this Court. During pendency of the aforesaid writ petition Asthbhuja Prasad Dubey expired on 11.09.1995, whereafter Ramesh Chandra Mishra claimed himself to be elected as member of Trustee Mandal as well as Manager/Secretary. Thereafter election is claimed to have been held on 28,04.2000, wherein Bankey Lal Yadav was shown to have been elected as President and Ramesh Chandra Mishra as Secretary/Manager. Ramesh Chandra Mishra applied before the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits seeking renewal of registration of society, which was accepted on 09.08.2002. Thereafter one Ravindra Kumar claiming himself to have been elected as Secretary/Manager applied for cancellation of registration. Notices were issued to both Ramesh Chandra Mishra and Ravindra Kumar. Ravindera Kumar son of Krishna Narain Upadhyaya claimed himself to be elected as Manager after the death of Asthbhuja Prasad Dubey. Assistant Registrar rejected the claim of Ravindra Kumar by order dated 28.02.2003. Against the said order appeal had been filed under Section 12-D of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The said appeal was rejected on 07.04.2003, against which writ petition No. 16954 of 2003 had been filed and this Court allowed the writ petition on 26.02.2004 and remanded the case back to be decided afresh by the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad. On 22.04.2004, this Court finally decided Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8577 of 1994 and mentioned that the only controversy between the parties is as to whether society with the name of Hari Shyam Khadi Gramodyog Sewa Sabha, the registration whereof has been renewed with the changed name is entitled to manage and run the institution in the name and style of U.P. Balika Vidyalaya Junior High School, Malak Harhar, District Allahabad or the new society registered in the name of Hari Shyam Khadi Gramodyog Sewa Samiti with Ravindra Nath Mishra is entitled to manage the affairs of the institution. Contention raised qua renewal of society with the changed name was dealt as follows: The contention raised on behalf of the respondent that the renewal of the society cannot be done with the changed name is totally misconceived and is based on misreading of the provisions of Section 3A(6) read with Section 12-A of the Societies Registration Act. In the facts of the case it is not in dispute that the change of name by deletion of the word "Sangh" from the society, was necessitated in view of U.P. Act No. 52 of 1975. It was always open to the society to seek renewal of its registration with the deletion of the word "Sangh" even after expiry of its original registration in accordance with the provisions of of the Societies Registration Act and there is no basis for contending that the renewal of the society cannot be granted with the changed name once its registration has expired. Reference in that regard is made to Section 3(3) of the Societies Registration Act, which permits renewal of registration of the society even after its earlier registration has expired. Even otherwise, the said contention of Sri P.M. Saxena, Senior Advocate, runs contrary to the pleading as made in counter affidavit para A, B, C, D and E. In paragraph 10E it is stated that the said action of the Registrar was uncalled for and illegal and Registrar should have referred the name of deponent (Ravindra Nath Mishra) to get the renewal of the aforesaid society to the State Government under Section 3B of the Act. Para 10E of the counter affidavit is being quoted herein below: That the aforesaid action of the Registrar was uncalled for and illegal as the Registrar should have referred the matter regarding the deponent's claim to get the renewal of the aforesaid society to the State Government under Section 3B of the Act. In such set of fact, the order passed by the Zila basic Shiksha Adhikari cannot be legally sustained. The order passed by the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari is hereby quashed. The matter is remanded to the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari top decide the dispute with regard to the claim of rival parties to manage the institution afresh strictly in the light of the judgment passed by this Court earlier vide order dated 21.9.93 in writ petition No. 20957 of 1990. It is needless to point out that on remand, the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari shall take into consideration all necessary facts including control over the finance of the institution, control over the teachers and staff of the institution, recognition of the office bearers by the educational authorities etc. While recording the finding as to which of the society is entitled to manage the said institution, the Zila Basic Shiksha Adhikari shall also take into consideration and pass reasoned order on the case pleaded by the parties.

(3.) Thereafter, the Commissioner, Allahabad passed order on 18.05.2004 and thereby set aside the order dated 28.02.2003 passed by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, and thereafter consequential order was passed on 03.07.2004 by Assistant Registrar. Against order dated 18.05.2004 writ petition No. 35113 of 2004 was filed. On presentation of the said writ petition interim order had been passed on 27.08.2004. While the aforesaid dispute was going on, on 28.05.2004, District Basic Education Officer passed order holding therein that educational institution was being run by subsequently registered society of which Krishna Narain Upadhyaya was the Manager/Secretary. The order dated 28.05.2004 has been challenged In writ petition No. 35107 of 2004. this Court quashed the order dated 28.05.2004 and remitted the matter back to be decided afresh on 01.09.2004 with observation that District Basic Education Officer shall decide the matter strictly in accordance with law having regard to the effects of judgment referred as also to affidavits filed in the suit proceedings. After remand while District Basic Education Officer was to hear the matter, Ravindra Kumar son of Krishna Narain Upadhyaya filed writ petition No. 39867 of 2004 before this Court claiming his entitlement to be heard in proceedings before the District Basic Education Officer. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 27.09.2004 by asking authority to entertain claim and decide the same as per judgment dated 01.09.2004. Special Appeal No. 1385 of 2004 challenging the order dated 27.09.2004 was dismissed with the observations that objections being urged in special appeal should be urged before the District Basic Education Officer, before whom disputer was pending. Thereafter, District Basic Education Officer has passed order on 01.01.2005, against which two writ petitions have been filed.