JUDGMENT K.N. Seth, J. - The Vedic Kanya Inter College, Dadri, District Ghaziabad is run by a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The affairs of the college are administered under a scheme of Administration framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. 2. Relevant facts as they emerge from the affidavits exchanged between the rival parties are that the election of the committee of management of the college was held on 3-6-1979, Sri Harish Chandra was elected President and Sri Chiranji Lal was elected as Manager of the committee of management. The Regional Inspectress of Girls Schools (hereinafter referred to as the RIGS) Meerut was informed about the election and the constitution of the new Committee of Management. She recognised the Committee of Management by her letter dated 18 8-1979. The President on 22-4-1980 issued a letter to the Manager to call upon a meeting of the Committee of Management. No meeting, however, was convened as desired by the President. On 22-6-1980' the Committee of Management held a meeting to consider the activities of the President. The Committee took a decision that the President Sri Harish Chandra had become disqualified and he is remover from the Committee of Management- The aforesaid decision of the Committee of Management was communicated to RIGs who issued a notice to the President to show cause why the resolution of the Committee dated 22-5-1980 be not accepted. It appears that Sri Harish Chandra convened a meeting of the general body on 11-6-1980 in which decision was taken to remove Chiranji Lal Manager from his office. Sri Om Prakash is said to have been elected as Manager in that meeting. RIGS on 28-7-1980 approved the decision of the general body meeting held on 11-6-1980. 3. Against the order of RIGS dated 28-7-1980 the Committee of Management filed a writ petition in this Court. While admitting the petition this Court by an order dated 7-8-1980 directed that the impugned order dated 28-7-1980 shall not be given affect so. That order was, however, vacated. The petition was ultimately dismissed by this Court. The petitioners took up the matter to the Supreme Court. By an order dated 3-12 1980 the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by directing that the RIGS. I circle, Meerut after hearing the parties shall give decision on the disputed questions by a reasoned order. 4. That order was, however, vacated. The petition was ultimately dismissed by this Court. The petitioners took up the matter to the Supreme Court. By an order dated 3-12 1980 the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by directing that the RIGS. I circle, Meerut after hearing the parties shall give decision on the disputed questions by a reasoned order. 4. When the matter came back before the RIGS again the petitioners submitted a written representation in which it was inter alia pleaded that since Sri Harish Chandra had already been removed from the office of the President of Committee of Management he had no power to call the alleged meeting on 11-6-1980 in which the Manager Sri Chiranji Lal is said to have been removed. It was also pleaded that the general body was not competent to remove the Manager. The RIGS by an order dated 7-1-1981 approved the proceedings of the meeting said to have been held on 11-6-1980 in which Sri Chiranji Lal was removed from the office of the Manager and in his place Sri Om Prakash was elected. The petitioners have challenged the legality of the aforesaid order. 5. Various pleas relating to the power and competency of Sri Harish Chandra to convene a meeting of the general body, the authority of the general body to remove a duly elected Manager etc. have been raised in support of the petition. It was also contended that the RIGS while passing the impugned order did not comply with the directions of the Supreme Court and failed to take late consideration the relevant provisions of the Scheme of Administration. The RIGS framed four questions for consideration : 1. Whether the meeting of the Committee of Management held on 9-6-1980 was valid ? 2. Whether the proceedings of the meeting of the Committee of Management held on 22-5-1980 were valid ? 3. Whether the proceedings of the meeting of the general body held on 11-6-1980 were valid ? 4. Whether the RIGS we competent to decide the aforesaid disputes. 6. It may be noted that the stand taken by the petitioners was that a valid meeting of Committee of Management had been held on 22-5-1980 in which Sri Harish Chandra was removed from the office of the President. The President was issued a show-cause notice by the RIGS but no decision was taken on the nutter. 6. It may be noted that the stand taken by the petitioners was that a valid meeting of Committee of Management had been held on 22-5-1980 in which Sri Harish Chandra was removed from the office of the President. The President was issued a show-cause notice by the RIGS but no decision was taken on the nutter. It was further asserted that since Sri Harish Chandra had been removed from the office of the President he was not competent to convene a meeting of the general body or of the Committee of Management. Moreover, the general body was not competent to remove a manager who had been validly elected. 7. The meeting held on 9-5-1980 in which the secretary was censured is of no consequence. Dealing with the validity of the meeting held on 22-5-1980 the RIGS came to the conclusion that the Committee of Management was not competent to remove the President. The RIGS referred to an order of the Civil Judge, Buland Shahar, in this connection without applying her mind to the facts and circumstances of that case. No reference was made to the provisions of the Scheme of Administration dealing with the circumstances in which a person renders himself disqualified and ceases to be a member and consequently incompetent to hold any office. Again, while dealing with the validity of the proceeding of the general body meeting said to have been held on 11-5-1981 the RIG failed to consider the question whether Harish Chandra had authority under the Scheme of Administration to convene a meeting of the general body and whether the general body was competent to remove a Manager who had been validly elected. The only question that appears to have been decided by RIGS was whether the notice of the meeting hid been duly circulated to the members. The relevant provisions of the Scheme of Administration have not been referred to and considered at all. It does not appear that the RIGS applied her mind to the basic controversies raised by the parties. 8. As noted earlier the Supreme Court had directed the RIGS to decide the disputed questions by a reasoned order. The relevant provisions of the Scheme of Administration have not been referred to and considered at all. It does not appear that the RIGS applied her mind to the basic controversies raised by the parties. 8. As noted earlier the Supreme Court had directed the RIGS to decide the disputed questions by a reasoned order. The impugned order indicates that though RIGS was consciences of the disputes raised by the parties and she arrived at certain conclusions but in coming to those conclusions she did not apply her mind to the relevant provisions of the Scheme of Administration nor gave reasons in support of the conclusions. As observed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 695 of 1971 Union of India v. M.L. Capoor and others, ( AIR 1974 SC 87 ) reasons are the links between the materials on which certain conclusions are based and the Actual conclusions. They disclose how the mind is applied to the subject-matter for a decision whether it is purely administrative or quasi-judicial. They should reveal a national nexus between the facts considered and the conclusion reached. The impugned order does not indicate how the mind of RIG was applied to the subject-matter for the conclusions arrived at. The order does not reveal a national nexus between the facts considered in the light of the relevant provisions of the Scheme of Administration and the conclusions arrived at in our opinion, the matter deserves to be considered afresh by the RIGS. 9. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order of RIGS dated 7-1-1981 is quashed. The RIGS is directed to reconsider the various disputes raised between the parties and pass a reasoned order as directed by the Supreme Court keeping in view the observations made in this judgment. Parties shall bear their own costs.