ORDER N.L. Ganguly, J. - Sri Hoob Lal Sharma as Manager and Sri Mahabir Prasad Dwivedi as President of the Committee of Management, Rashtriya Inter College, Raya, District Mathura have filed the present writ petition challenging the order dated 30-3-1991 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Mathura, hereinafter referred to as the 'D.LO.S.', which is anneaure-1 to this petition. The D.I.O.S. by the said order directed that Sri Satish Chandra shall function as President and Sri Hari Prasad Sharma, as Manager of the petitioner-Committee of Management. 2. Sri R. P. Goel, Advocate, filed a caveat on behalf of Sri Satish Chandra and Hari Prasad Sharma. The petitioner prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing the order of the D.I.O.S. dated 30th March, 1991, and also for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the working of the Committee of Management of the institution elected on 31-8-1986 by which the petitioner No. 2, Shri Mahabir Prasad Dwivedi, and petitioner No. 3, Sri Hub Lal Sharma were elected as president and manager, respectively, of the said college. 3. Admittedly, there had been litigations going on between the parties and a Writ Petition No. 24683 of 1989, Hub Lal Sharma v. D.I.O.S., which is pending, in which an order of single operation passed by the D.I.O. S. was stayed by this Court by an interim order dated 21-5-1990. 4. According to the case of the rival parties, there are two versions about the validity constituted committee of Management of the Institution. According to the case of the petitioners, the last validly elected Committee of Management is of 31-8-1986 in which the petitioner, Mahabir Prasad Dwivedi and Sri Hub Lal Sharma, respectively, were elected as the President and Manager of the said Committee. It is stated that the said Committee elected in 1986 sent papers for recognition before the D.I.O.S. but there was no response from the D.I.O.S. The petitioners stated that their Committee of Management continued to be in control over the affairs of the Management of Institution. In the meantime an`"order dated 11-10-1989 was passed by the D.I.O.S. by which he passed orders for single operation of the accounts of the institution. The order of single operation passed by the D.I.O.S. was challenged before this Court in writ petition. In the meantime an`"order dated 11-10-1989 was passed by the D.I.O.S. by which he passed orders for single operation of the accounts of the institution. The order of single operation passed by the D.I.O.S. was challenged before this Court in writ petition. No. 24683 of 1989 and, as stated earlier, an interim order dated 21-5-1990 was passed staving the operation of the order for single operation. The petitioners submitted that no election was ever held after 31-8-1986 and Sri Satish Chandra Sharma and Sri Hari Prasad Sharma were never elected as the Manager and President of the Committee of Management of the Institution. It was stated that Sri Satish Chandra was not even a member of the general body of the Committee. 5. Now there are two dates of election of the Committee of Management as pleaded by the rival claimants. One is 31-8-1986 and the other is 31-12-1989. The petitioners have seriously challenged the alleged election of 31-12-1989 in which Sri Satish Chandra and Hari Prasad Sharma were alleged to have been elected. According to the provisions of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921, as amended by U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981, standard proforma for scheme of administration for recognised institution is provided. According to the said Act, every Committee of Management elected and recognised shall continue for a period of 3 years and within one month after the expiry of the said three years' period, new Committee of Management shall have to be constituted again by fresh elections. In case, the Committee of Management fails to get the elections conducted within the said period, it is provided that an authorised controller be appointed who shall take over immediately after the expiry of the period for which the Committee of Management was elected and get the elections conducted according to law. The idea and purpose of getting an authorised controller appointed after the expiry of the period of 3 years for managing the affairs of the Committee of Management of the Institution is to set that the Committee of Management may be vigilant to get elections held within the time schedule provided by the Act. No scheme of administration which is inconsistent with the provisions of the amended provisions of the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981 is valid. No scheme of administration which is inconsistent with the provisions of the amended provisions of the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981 is valid. The allegation of the petitioners that since their scheme of administration provides that in case no election is held within the time prescribed thereof it shall be the duty of the outgoing Committee of Management get the elections conducted. In other words, the submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that although their scheme of administration is inconsistent with the amended scheme of administration as contemplated by the amended Act No. 1 of 1981, still they should be permitted to get the elections conducted. The rival claimants who have been directed to function as manager and President of the Committee of Management were restrained in the civil suit by injunction dated 1-1-1990, specifically, not act upon any resolution as alleged to have been passed in the meeting dated 31-12-1989. 6. The D.I.O.S. in his order impugned observed that the Committee of Management never got scheme of administration modified and approved after the last elections held in August, 1979. The D.I.O.S. further stated that the last elected Committee of Management in the year 1979 continued to be in power illegally for such a long time which renders their continuance illegal. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Math, District Mathura, had also directed to get the elections conducted but the Committee of Management never complied with the orders of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate also. It is stated that only three members of the Committee of Management are alive, who also are rendered ineffective on account of no fresh elections for more than a decade. The D.I.O.S. in his order observed that the non-compliance of the orders afore-mentioned clearly makes out a case for interference under S. 16D(3)(ii) of the Act and pass orders for continuance of Sri Hari Prasad Sharma as Manager and Sri Satish Chandra Dwivedi as the President of the Committee of Management for a period of four months till they get the Committee of Management constituted by fresh elections in accordance with the approved scheme of administration of the institution. From the facts stated above, it is abundantly clear that the scheme of administration of the institution was never got modified as provided in U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981. From the facts stated above, it is abundantly clear that the scheme of administration of the institution was never got modified as provided in U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981. It is also admitted that the Committee of Management alleged to have been elected in August, 1986, if accepted to have been duly elected in August, 1986 is also not entitled to continue after expiry of three years one month. There is, admittedly, an injunction by the Civil Court restraining the respondents from doing any act in purchased of the resolution dated 31-12-1989. Thus, the facts indicate that none of the parties at present are legally competent to be in office of the Committee of Management. The D. I.O.S. by his order impugned directed that Sri Hari Prasad Sharma and Sri Satish Chandra Dwivedi are permitted to get elections held within a period of four months in accordance with the approved scheme of administration. It is nowhere stated that there was any approval to the scheme of administration in accordance with the U.P. Act No. 1 of 1981. On the contrary. the petitioners stated that old scheme of administration is still in operation and effective which provides for getting the elections conducted by the earlier Committee of Management. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri V.C. Misra, and learned counsel for the respondents Sri R.P. Goel who has filed caveat. I consider that in view of the facts and circumstances, as narrated above, the order of the D.I.O.S. cannot be allowed to stand and is liable to be quashed. Sri R. P. Goel, advocate, has argued that the institution cannot be allowed to function in absence of any Committee of Management or authority to look after the affairs of the Management of the Institution. He is right. The institution and the interest of the students of the institution is the first and foremost factor to be considered. There is a fund of Rs. 2 lakhs belonging to the institution which is also to be preserved and further necessary direction for smooth running and Management of the Institution be given. He is right. The institution and the interest of the students of the institution is the first and foremost factor to be considered. There is a fund of Rs. 2 lakhs belonging to the institution which is also to be preserved and further necessary direction for smooth running and Management of the Institution be given. This Court after setting aside the order of the D.I.O.S. could have remitted back the matter before the D.I.O.S. to reconsider the matter afresh and in case he arrives at a conclusion that there are rival claims of two Committees of Management, then to make reference to the Deputy Director of Education of the region to find out the Committee of Management actually in effective control of the affairs of the management. Since the term of the petitioners-Committee of Management have admittedly lapsed and respondents- Committee of Management have been inducted by order of Civil Court not to function on basis of resolution dated 1-1-1990. 1 am convinced that it would not serve any purpose to permit the issue to the D.I.O.S. for remitting the matter for decision under S. 16A(7) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act. This Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution considers it necessary to solve the tangle going on between the rival group of persons claiming to be the legal Committee of Management. The petitioners and contesting respondents if are permitted to litigate further for getting declaration from competent Civil Court or Educational Authorities it is not likely that the dispute be decided in near future. The interest and welfare of students of the institution needs a legal Committee of Management at the earliest. In these circumstances, I consider it appropriate to direct the Deputy Director of Education, Region Mathura, to make responsibility to regularise the matter or) the lines indicated order below. Since the Committee o Management for the institution has to be formed a new out of the members of the general body of the Society of Institution - Firstly, the Deputy Director of Education shall get the scheme of administration of the institution approved in the lines as contemplated the U.P. Act No. I of 1981 within a period of 4 weeks from the date of filing of the certified copy of this order. The petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 and respondents Nos. The petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 and respondents Nos. 2 and 3, both, shall submit the scheme of administration before the Deputy Director of Education for getting the scheme of administration of the institution approved, in accordance with the Act No. I of 1981 within 15 days from the date of this judgment. who shall pass final orders about approval of the scheme of administration in the next 15 days. (2) After the scheme of administration is finalised, the Deputy Director of Education of the Region shall appoint an officer of the rank of the Associate D.I.O.S./Additional D.I.O.S. of the district to function as authorised controller who shall be directed to publish notice inviting application for membership of the general body of the institution in the local Hindi newspaper within one month from the date of his appointment. The requisite amount of membership fee for ordinary members and general body as fixed in the scheme of administration may be accepted by the authorised controller and kept in the account of the institution. The list of the existing life members patrol if any, may be prepared by the authorised controller shall be final and acceptable by both the parties. The authorised controller shall get the election of the Committee of Management conducted within the next 6 weeks from the date of finalising all the lists of members. The authorised controller shall get the elections concluded and submit the list of the elected office-bearers of Managing Committee before the D.I.O.S. in the time schedule as indicated above who shall pass necessary orders recognising the Committee of Management and get the charge given to such elected office-bearers from the authorised controller. 7. 1 have indicated the scheduled programme for the installation of legally constituted committee of Management for the institution and the learned counsel for the parties have not expressed any dissent to it. The amount of Rs. 2 lakhs of the institution shall remain in deposit and either of the parties shall have no right to touch the same. The said.amount shall be at the disposal of the duly elected Committee of Management as indicated above. 8. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. 9. Let a copy of this judgment may be given to the learned counsel for the parties within seven days on payment of usual charges.