JUDGMENT N.D. Ojha, J. - The Society known as Shri Krishna Jyotish Pathshala Bishalpur in the district of Pilibhit runs an Intermediate College known as Shri Krishna Jyotish Pathshala Kanya Inter College, Bishalpur, district Pilibhit. The Committee of Management which manages the affairs of the college is constituted in accordance with the Scheme of Administration framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 duly approved by the Deputy Director of Education. An election for the Committee of Management had been held on 23rd June, 1982 and the period of the said Committee was three years. The tenure of the Committee Management elected on 23rd June, 1982 expired on 22nd June 1, 1985. It appears that thereafter the President of the Committee of Management in order to hold fresh elections took proceedings as contemplated by the Scheme of Administration and invited applications for membership by 30th November, 1985. Now 30th December, 1985 stands fix as the date for elections of the Committee of Management. This writ petition has been filed before us during the winter holidays after obtaining the permission of the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice. The prayer contained in this writ petition is for quashing two orders passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Pilibhit, Respondent No. 1 dated 20th and 21st December, 1985 respectively. A further prayer has been made in the writ petition for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents not to implement the impugned orders and not to hold the election scheduled to take place on 30th December, 1985. 2. It has been urged by counsel for the Petitioners that both the impugned orders passed by the Respondent No. 1 are without jurisdiction. A perusal of the order dated 20th December, 1985 indicates that applications made by Respondents 2 to 19 for being enrolled as members of the society were rejected by the President of the existing Committee of Management on 12th December, 1985 and that order has been set aside by the Respondent No. 1. It has been urged by counsel for the Petitioners that the order passed by the President of the Committee of Management on 12th December, 1985 is final and no appeal lay against that order to the District Inspector of Schools and consequently the order dated 20th December, 1985 passed by the D.I.O.S. was without jurisdiction. 3. It has been urged by counsel for the Petitioners that the order passed by the President of the Committee of Management on 12th December, 1985 is final and no appeal lay against that order to the District Inspector of Schools and consequently the order dated 20th December, 1985 passed by the D.I.O.S. was without jurisdiction. 3. Shri L.N. Pandey, Standing Counsel has appeared before us for Respondent No. 1. Respondent No. 2 has also put in appearance and Sri Ajit Kumar, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on his behalf. Having heard learned counsel for the parties we are of opinion that even if it may be accepted that the order dated 20th December, 1985 passed by the Respondent No. 1 is without jurisdiction, no case has been made out for interference with that order under Article 226 of the Constitution for it is a settled principle that if the effect of setting aside an illegal order would be restore an equally illegal order of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution is not to be exercised. As seen above, the applications from those persons who intended to become members of the society. According to the advertisement, these applications were to be made by 30th November, 1985 and the membership fee was to be deposited with the treasurer of the College. Respondents No. 2 to 19 approached the Respondent No. 1 on 30th November, 1985 namely, the last date by which the applications for enrolment as members were to be made, asserting that they approached the President of the Committee of Management with the request that they may be made members of the society after accepting their membership fee but the declined to accept their applications or the membership fee. It further appears that there upon the D.I.O.S. on 30th November, 1985 itself sent those applications to the President of the Committee of Management along with drafts of the membership fee. It is thus to be seen that the membership fee as well as the requisite application reached the President on 30th November, 1985 i.e. within the time mentioned in the advertisement made in this behalf. 4. Under the Scheme of Administration these applications could be dismissed if the application suffered from any of the disqualifications mentioned in the Scheme of Administration. These applications, as already pointed out, were dismissed by the President on 12th December, 1985. 4. Under the Scheme of Administration these applications could be dismissed if the application suffered from any of the disqualifications mentioned in the Scheme of Administration. These applications, as already pointed out, were dismissed by the President on 12th December, 1985. A copy of that order has been attached with the writ petition and it indicates that they had not been dismissed on the ground that the applicants suffered from any of the disqualifications mentioned in the Scheme of Administration. They were dismissed on technical grounds namely, that the applications were not made to the treasure as contemplated by the advertisement made in this behalf and further that the applications do not state that the applicants were not minors and no criminal prosecution was pending against them for an offence involving moral turpitude. Nothing in the Scheme of Administration as been pointed out to us which authorises the President to reject an application for membership even if the said application accompanied with for membership fee has been received within the time prescribed and the applicant does not suffer from any of the disqualifications mentioned in the Scheme of Administration. In this view of the matter, the applications made by Respondents 2 to 19 for being enrolled as members of the society were obviously rejected arbitrarily. The effect of quashing the order of the D.I.O.S. dated 20th December, 1985 could be tor restore the order of the President dated 12th December 1985 which on the face of it cannot sustained and it is for this reason that we are of the opinion that this is not a fit case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution in so far as the order of the D.I.O.S. dated 20th December, 1985 is concerned. 5. As regards the order dated 21st December, 1985 passed by D.I.O.S., it has been urged by counsel for the Petitioners that under the Scheme of Administration the proceedings for holding the election have to be initiated two months prior to the actual date of election. It has been pointed out that it is by the order dated 21st December, 1985 that the D.I.O.S. fixed 30th December, 1985 as the date of the meeting in which the election was to be held. It has been pointed out that it is by the order dated 21st December, 1985 that the D.I.O.S. fixed 30th December, 1985 as the date of the meeting in which the election was to be held. According to the counsel for the Petitioners since the date was fixed only after 9 days of the order passed in this behalf by the D.I.O.S. the meeting scheduled to be held on 30th December, 1985 cannot be held. We find it difficult to agree with this submission either. Under the Scheme of Administration the machinery for holding the election is to be set in motion by the President of the Committee of Management itself. It is not stated in the writ petition that the steps as contemplated by the Scheme of Administration at the appropriate time were not taken by the Petitioners for holding the elections. On the other hands, the sequence suggests that necessary steps were taken. It is even the Petitioner's case that they invited applications for enrollment as members and 30th November, 1985 was the last date for this purpose. A perusal of the impugned order dated 21st December, 1985 indicates that it is the President of the Committee of Management who had himself made a request to the D.I.O.S. for fixing a date for holding the election by the end of December. 1985 and it is on the basis of this request made by the President that the D.I.O.S. fixed 30th December, 1985 as the date for holding the election. Having himself made a request to fix a date for election by the end of December, 1985 it does not now lie in the month of the President to challenge the fixation of 30th December, 1985 as the date for holding the election and it is for this reason that we find no substance in this submission. 6. No other points has been pressed. 7. In the result, we find no merits in this writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.