DHARAM RAJ SINGHGUARDIAN TEACHER ASSOCIATION Vs. BABBAN PANDEYBOARD OF HIGH SCHOOL AND INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an order dated 20-2-1999 the writ petition No. 6987 of 1999 was disposed of. This petition was moved by the Guardian Teacher Association and another. In the said writ petition it was prayed that on account of dispute between respondent Nos. 4 and 5 the names of the students and the forms and fees collected by these two persons (respondent Nos. 4 and 5) were not being forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools due to which no admit card was being issued to them for the ensuing examination to be held in March, 1999. In the said order dated 20-2-1999 it was directed that both respondent Nos. 4 and 5 should forward the fees and forms collected by each of them to the District Inspector of Schools within a period of one week and in case they had already deposited the fees and from then they should personally attend the Office of District Inspector of Schools and produce the relevant receipt so that the District Inspector of Schools can take appropriate step for issuing admit card to the students. This order dated 20-2-1999 has sought to be recalled by means of the present application for recalling the order dated 20-2-99 filed by respondent No. 5.

(2.) Mr. Sudhakar Pandey, learned Counsel for the applicant-respondent No. 5 contends that the applicant was the officiating Principal during the period when the forms were supposed to be filled in by the students. Therefore, no one else could forward the form. He also contends that the name of the students which have been forwarded by respondent No. 4 were not bona fide students of the school since they did not deposit the fees for the whole session nor they had attended the school, therefore, they could not appear as regular student of the school in the examination. He also contends that the said writ petition was disposed of without giving any notice to respondent No. 5, therefore, he is aggrieved by the said order as such he is asking for recalling the said order.

(3.) Shri I.R. Singh, learned Counsel for the writ petitioners on the other hand contends that the petitioners have no concerned with the internal dispute between respondent Nos. 4 and 5. They interest was that the students, who were not issued admit card because of non-submission of form and fees by respondent No. 4 and 5, may be permitted to appear in the ensuing examination. Whether the students are bona fide or not that could be examined by the District Inspector of Schools while issuing admit card. If the students have appeared by mistake, in that event, it is open to the Board to withheld the result or to cancel the result if there is any irregularity or if it is found that he students were not eligible to appear as a result students. According to him the scope of the writ petition was not the forum where the dispute between respondent Nos. 4 and 5 could be threshed out. He also contends that the applicant is no more the Principal of the said school by virtue of an order dated 8-1-1999 contained in Annexure-25 to the application for recalling the order and this order according to him has not been challenged by respondent No. 5, therefore, the applicant cannot claim any locus standi, now to move this application for recalling the order dated 20-2-99 when he is not the Principal. According to him the applicant could not have claimed to be the Officiating Principal since he did not possess the requisite qualification which was so held in writ petition No. 17048 of 1984 since disposed of on 12-3-1985 as well as in writ petition No. 6126 of 1990, decided on 27-2-1990 on the same issue that the applicant did not possess the requisite qualification for holding the post of Principal. If the applicant did not possess such qualification he could not officiate as Principal, therefore, his officiating is wholly void. On these grounds, he contends that this application should be dismissed.