ORDER 1. Special leave granted. 2. Protracted dispute is going on between two factions, trying to control the administration of an educational institution called "Kisan Inter College Mohiuddinpur, Meerut". The Managing Committee headed by the appellant, in the appeal herein, was elected and constituted as a result of the directions issued Arising out of SLPs (C) Nos. 18066-67 of 1993by the Deputy Director (Education) Meerut. Respondents 5 and 6, in the appeal herein, challenged the said election by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Allahabad High Court. The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the election and issued further directions. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 29-10-1993. 3. The Deputy Director (Education) Meerut by his order dated 18-12-1992 issued the following directions : "After due consideration of the issue, I am giving the following analysis and explanation of the facts in the light scheme of Administration and Intermediate Education Act, 1921. 1. Neither of the two claimants are in effective control of the management and functioning of the institution. 2. Shri Rajendra Singh held the process of election at the place Jony Institution. In case he had some apprehension of any dispute or quarrel, he should have sought police help for maintaining law and order. In spite of that in case the election was to be held, at some place other than the institution, then, in the light of facts in question, prior permission could be obtained from the District Inspector of Schools. Shri Sheo Raj Singh told that in his general body meeting there were 390 voters out of which 288 participated in the election. On the other side Shri Rajendra Singh stated that out of 429 members of 1991, eight have died and membership of one has been terminated. Thus in all 420 members were sent agenda. Shri Rajend.a Singh further stated that in the alleged election held in 1989 information was given to 295 members. All these members are stated to have been made up to 30-6-1977. The plea of Shri Rajendra Singh is that Shri Sheo Raj Singh, who claims himself to be the Manager, is not even a member of the General Body. The Manage, nent Committee had terminated his membership on 6-7-1988. All these members are stated to have been made up to 30-6-1977. The plea of Shri Rajendra Singh is that Shri Sheo Raj Singh, who claims himself to be the Manager, is not even a member of the General Body. The Manage, nent Committee had terminated his membership on 6-7-1988. He states that the name of Shri Sheo Raj Singh is not there even in me list for 1992 election published in the year 1991. It has already been stated that presently none of the claimants is in control of the functioning of the institution. In any election, the electoral roll has its own significance. Before starting the election, specially in the disputed cases, it is necessary to give final shape to the electoral roll. Because, at present a gazetted officer is acting as the authorised controller of the institution in the institution, who has got full rights of the. Management Committee, he can give final shape to the list of the members of the General Body and the electoral list of the members of the General Body and the electoral list in his capacity of the President of the executive committee of the Management Commiuee and can get the same approved from the District Inspector of Schools. Because the institution has its important place in the district, a permanent arrangement for its managment and functioning is urgently required. It is the duty specially on the part of the authorised controller and equally on the part of the District Inspector of Schools to hold the time bound election process. On the basis of the above discussion, I have arrived at a conclusion that it will not be justifiable or recognise any of the above two disputed claimants management committees. ORDER The claims of the both the claimant committees arc rejected. It is directed to the authorised controller that within one month from the issue of this order that he should get the list of member of the General Body approved from the District Inspector of Schools and get the same circulated and three months thereafter, after getting the Management Comminee constituted, he should ensure handing over charge to the newly constituted Management Committee. After appointing some gazetted officer as the election officer, he should get its approval from the District Inspector of Schools. After appointing some gazetted officer as the election officer, he should get its approval from the District Inspector of Schools. The District Magistrate himself should make arrangements for Senior Superintendent of Police and the observers of the District Inspector of Schools." 4. Pursuant to the above-quoted directions elections to the Managing Committee were held on 17-6-1993. The group belonging to the appellant was successful at the election and they formed the Managing Committee to administer the institution. It is not disputed that the said election was approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut. 5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The Deputy Director in his order dated 18-12-1992 (quoted above) gave a clear finding that neither of the two factions was in the effective control of the management of the institution in dispute on the said date. It was on the basis of the said finding that the Deputy Director directed the holding of the fresh elections. We are of the view that there was no material before the High Court to have reached a different finding than the one reached by the Deputy Director. The High Court was bound, in the facts and circumstances of this case, by the finding of the Deputy Director that none of the parties were effectively controlling the institution. The High Court fell into patent error in the. exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in setting aside the order of the Deputy Director dated 18-2-1992 and the consequent election on the basis of the material before it. The High Court should not, ordinarily, interfere with the disputes of rival factions in respect of educational institutions. These matters should be left to be decided finaliy by the authorities constituted by the State Government to supervise these institutions. 6. We allow the appeals set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 29-10-1993 and dismiss the writ petition filed by Respondents 5 and 6 before the High Court. No costs. For Citation: 1995 Supp(4) SCC 78 Vikas Info Solutions Pvt. Ltd.