BISHWANATH PATHAK Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the prayer is to quash the order passed by the Chairman, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board'), contained in Office Order No. 7745 dated 9 -11 -1989 (Annexure 1) communicated to the petitioner by the Secretary of the Board constituting an ad hoc Managing Committee after dissolving the existing Managing Committee of Deo Naravan Mithila Sanskrit Uchcha Vidyalaya, Sabha Sasaula, Sitamarhi. By the said order, Chandradeo Mishra (respondent No. 8) and one Raj Kumar Jha were appointed as the Chairman and the Secretary of the ad hoc Managing Committee respectively along with three other persons to function as the members of the said ad hoc Managing Committee.

(2.) In short, the relevant facts are that in village Sasaula Sabha of Sitamarhi district, a Sanskrit School known as Deo Narayan Mithila Sanskrit Uchcha Vidyalaya was established in the year 1940 to impart education up to Madhyama standard equivalent to Matriculation. The petitioner's school was recognised by the Bihar Board of Sanskrit Education. In the year 1979, the present Managing Committee of the said School with the petitioner as Secretary was constituted. The petitioner donated land and other assets to the School valued at Rs. 10,000/ - and as such he is a donor member of the Managing Committee. The Government of Bihar promulgated several ordinances in the year 1980 -81 and finally enacted Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board Act, which came into effect from 24th May, 1982 for development and better supervision of Sanskrit education up to Madhyama standard in the State. According to the Sub -section (2)(n) of Section 6, the Board, subject to the provisions of the Rules made under the said ordinance, is empowered to constitute and dissolve the Managing Committee. According to the case of the petitioner, the Bihar State Non -Government Sanskrit High School (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1976 does not have statutory force and as such, the Board has got no statutory power to constitute or dissolve the Managing Committee of the School. It is stated that the Board has got only supervisory power and it cannot determine the service conditions of teaching and non -teaching staff of any institution and that the competent authority in this regard is the Managing Committee. However, according to the case of the petitioner, by the impugned order the Chairman of the Board passed an order by which the duly -constituted Managing Committee was dissolved and an ad hoc Managing Committee was constituted which is without any authority and totally in a most illegal manner due to some controversy with regard to appointment of the Acting Headmaster of the School.

(3.) According to the petitioner, after retirement of the permanent Headmaster, the Managing Committee decided to appoint one Ram Chandra Chaudhary, who was more qualified and the seniormost teacher in the School and fulfilled the criteria, as In -charge Headmaster of the School. Respondent No. 7 however, was illegally issuing School Leaving Certificate and posing himself as self -proclaimed Headmaster Incharge of the School and was collecting money from the students for which he was asked to show cause. He, however, approached the Chairman of the Board for upsetting the smooth functioning of the School, which was done with the aid of the Secretary of the Board by constituting ad hoc Managing Committee, vide impugned order (Annexure 1).