COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT BRANCHMARSHI SRI RAM KRISHNA INTER COLLEGE WALIDPUR DISTT MAU Vs. D I O S DISTT MAU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUDHIR Narain, J. The petitioners filed writ petition seeking writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 26th August, 1997, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Mau, respondent No. 1 whereby he prepared the list of the members of Bramharshi Shri Ram Krishna Inter Col lege, Walidpur, District Mau (hereinafter referred to as the Institution ).

(2.) IN respect of the election of the Committee of Management of the INstitu tion Two writ petitions were filed num bered 18281 of 1989 and 21252 of 1990. These writ petitions were held to be in- fructuous as the term of the Committee of Management had expired. The Court dis missed the writ petitions with the follow ing observations: "in that view of the matter these two writ petitions are dismissed as having become in fructuous, with a direction to the District INspector of Schools to decide the rival claim of member ship alter scrutinizing the list of members sub mitted by both the parties, by affording reasonable opportunity of hearing within a period of four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him. The District INspector of Schools, Azamgarh shall also take steps to appoint the Authorised Con troller, if not already appointed, in respect of the institution, who will manage the affairs of the institution. The District INspector of Schools shall also take steps for conduct of the election of the institution, after the list of members are scrutinised, through the Authorised Controller, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of finalisation of the mem bers list. " The District INspector of School gave notice to the parties concerned and three sets of lists of the members were produced before him. One list was submitted by Surya Bhan Ojha, petitioner No. 2, second by Shyam Narain Rai and the third list was produced by Pradumn Nath Mishra. There was dispute in the Civil Court in respect of the members of the INstitution in the year 1961, which was decided on the basis of the consent of the parties. This list was as also taken into account by the District INspec tor of Schools. He did not accept the list submitted by petitioner No. 2 and the lists submitted by Hari Narain Rai, Shyam Narain Rai and Pradumn Nath Mishra were accepted as correct.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the District Inspector of Schools has not decided the controversy regarding to members of the institution in accordance with the direction of the High Court in the Writ Petitions noted above. It is contended that petitioner No. 2 had submitted a detailed representation giving the list of the member and it was incum bent upon respondent No. 1 to examine regarding the membership of each of such persons. It is further urged that the petitioner, being Head Clerk of the in stitution, is not deprived from being a member of the Society of the Institution it is not denied that the petitioner No. 2 was afforded opportunity by respondent No. 1. He had taken into consideration the various lists submitted by three sets of persons. If the petitioner was aggrieved against the decision, he could have filed a suit in respect of the membership of the society of the institution. The question of membership in a society depends upon the various facts and that can be properly in vestigated in a civil suit.