MANAGINGCOMMITTEE;HPDJAIN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Managing Committee of the H, P. D Jain School, Arrah (hereinafter referred to as 'the School') and its Secretary have, in general, questioned the authority of the State to interfere with the administration of the school and, in particular, questioned the legality of the order of the District Education Officer dated 13th January 1994 as contained in the memo portion of Annexure-1 directing the outgoing headmaster of the school to hand over the charge of the office to respondent No. 7 Brahmadeo Singh, on his superannuation from service with effect from 31st January 1994.

(2.) The school founded by Sri Adi Nath Trust, a Jain Religious Trust of Arrah town is said to be a minority institution. In support of its minority character, reliance has been placed on the order of the then Director of Public Instructions, dated 10th November, 1965 declaring the school as a minority institution under the provisions of Rule 2 (Ka 13) of the Bihar High Schools (Constitution, Powers and Functions of Managing Committee) Rules, 1964, Mr Awadh Bihari Ojha, learned counsel for respondent No. 7, attempted to challenge the minority character of the school on the ground that it has not been so recognised under Section 18 of the Bihar Non-Government Secondary Schools (Taking Over of Management and Control) Act, 1982. However, in view of the aforesaid order the Director issued in exercise of statutory powers we are not inclined to go into that question simply because a formal order in terms of Section 18 (2) of the said Act not been issued, when the institution has all along been recognised as a minority institution for about three decades by now.

(3.) Counsel for the parties have made lengthy submissions regarding inter se seniority between respondent No. 7 and Shailendra Kumar Jain, who has been authorised to act as the incharge headmaster by the managing committee Mr. Ojha in support of his contention that respondent No. 7 is senior to Shailendra Kumar Jain referred to certain orders as contained in Annexures A/7, F/7 and B/7 by which respondent No. 7 has been held to be senior and granted senior selection grade earlier in point of time. Mr. K. D. Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioners; on the other hand, submitted that the aforesaid orders touching upon the management and administration of a minority institution are without jurisdiction and not binding on the managing committee. Counsel placed reliance on Annexure-3, a gradation list said to have been prepared by the managing committee sometime in 1991 as per which the said Shailendra Kumar Jain has been held to be senior to Brahmadeo Singh and, in fact, the seniormost teacher of the school on the basis of their dates of appointment in the school Mr. Ojha contended that the aforesaid order, to wit Annexures A/7, F/7 and B/7 having not been challenged by the managing committees for all these years by the managing committee on any other person they must be deemed to have acquiesced in the authority of the State and its officers in issuing the orders. He, accordingly, urged that respondent No. 7 having been held to be the seniormost teacher of the school, this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction should not interfere with the impugned order authorising him to act as the headmaster.