JUDGMENT N.K. Mitra, J. Heard Mr. Banerjee, learned advocate for the petitioner. None appears for the respondents inspite of service of notice upon them as would appear from the receipt filed in court today, specially, the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education. The petitioners as guardian of their respective wards studying in Chandipur High School, P.O. Chandipur, Dist,-Malda made objections before the District Inspector of Schools (SE), Malda concerned in September, 1996 alleging various irregularities in the matter of reconstitution of the managing committee of the said school held on 2nd September, 1996. As nothing was done by the said authority in the matter, the petitioners moved a writ application before this Hon'ble Court which was disposed of on 14th November, 1996 by the Hon'ble Justice Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J. inter alia, passing the following order : "After hearing the parties appearing and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that since the validity of election is under challenge and since serious allegations were made in the petition, the matter should be considered by the Board in accordance with the provision of paragraph 34 of the procedure for holding election treating this writ application as a representation of the petitioners under the said paragraph 34 and disposed of the same in accordance with the law and after hearing the affected parties within four months from the date of communication of this order. Until the matter is disposed of by the Board in terms of the order, the respondents shall maintain status quo as on date as regards functioning of the managing committee. The writ application is disposed of accordingly without any order as to costs." 2. Subsequently, the Secretary of the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education vide his Memo. dated 7th April, 1997 informed the writ petitioners about the decision of the President of the Board, rejecting the prayer of the writ petitioners and declaring the election held on 2nd September, 1996 for reconstitution of the Managing committee of the said school as valid (Annexure 'F' to the writ application), and the said order of the President of the Board is the subject matter of challenge in the present writ application. 3. It is submitted by Mr. 3. It is submitted by Mr. Banerjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners that when the word 'Board' was used in the order of Bhagabati Prasad Banerjee, J. as referred to above, the matter was to be disposed of by the Board itself and not by the President alone as the President cannot exercise the powers of the Board, unless there is a provision in the statute empowering him to that effect. Mr. Banerjee further refers to sub-s. (2) of S. 28 of the Act and contends inter alia, that only in the case of an emergency, the President may exercise any of the powers of the Board or the executive committee and in support of his contention, he refers to the decision of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Smt. Lilabati Kangilal vs. Administrator, Nasra Girls' High School & Ors., 71 CWN 216. In that case, the notice for termination of the Assistant Headmistress of the Nasra Girls' High School issued by the Administrator of the said school was challenged under the writ jurisdiction inter alia, on the ground that no such notice could be served without the approval of the Board of Secondary Education as Rule 25 of the existing rules provided inter alia, that in case of aided schools, the power of the committee of appointing and removing teachers, granting promotion and increment should be exercised subject to the approval of the Board of Secondary Education who will consider the recommendation of the Director of Public Instruction, Government of West Bengal before granting approval in the matter. The Hon'ble Justice D. Basu held inter alia, in the said decision inter alia, as follows : "31. The Board, it is to be noted, is a body corporate (s. 3(2)) and when rule 25 speaks of approval of the Board, it means that the approval must be given by the Board, at a meeting held in the manner referred to in S. 14. The President cannot exercise the powers of the Board unless there is a provision in the statute empowering him to that effect. It is sub-s. (2) of s. 28 which is relied upon by the respondents in support of the contention that the President can exercise the powers of the Board in an 'emergency'. The President cannot exercise the powers of the Board unless there is a provision in the statute empowering him to that effect. It is sub-s. (2) of s. 28 which is relied upon by the respondents in support of the contention that the President can exercise the powers of the Board in an 'emergency'. Sub-sections (1) and (2) of S. 28 are as follows : "(1) The President shall be responsible for carrying out and giving effect to the decisions of the Board and of any Committee or Council constituted under this Act. (2) The President may, in any emergency, exercise any of the powers of the Board provided however that he shall not act contrary to any decision of the Board, and shall, as soon thereafter as may be, report to the Board the action taken by him together with reasons therefor." 4. It is evident that the normal power of the President under sub-s. (1) of S. 28 is only to give effect to the decisions of the Board. Sub-section (2) engrafts an exception, but the scope of this sub-section is limited by the word 'emergency'. Mr. Banerjee has also relied upon another decision of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Sachinath Ghosh & Ors. vs. West Bengal Board of Secondary Education & Ors., reported in 1976(2) CLJ 289 wherein the Hon'ble Justice Tarun Kumar Basu, discussing the scope and ambit of s. 28(2) of the Act observed inter alia, as follows : "20. This s. 28(2) clearly empowers the President to exercise all the powers of the Board subject to certain conditions. The first condition is that there must be an emergency. The second condition is that the President must not act contrary to any decision of the Board. The third condition is that he must report to the Board as soon as possible after the action taken. The fourth condition is that he must state the reasons in his report as to why he exercised the powers of the Board under S. 28(2) of the Act." 5. The third condition is that he must report to the Board as soon as possible after the action taken. The fourth condition is that he must state the reasons in his report as to why he exercised the powers of the Board under S. 28(2) of the Act." 5. Thus whatever may be the meaning of the word 'emergency', it is to be noted that in the present case the impugned order of the President which was forwarded by the Secretary of the Board to the writ petitioners (Annexure 'F' to the writ application), did not recite that the President was exercising the powers of the Board in view of an emergency. So even if S. 28(2) of the Act were applicable to the facts of the present case, it appears that the President has not acted in accordance with its terms,-nor even professed to do so, inasmuct as, neither of the conditions precedent for exercise of the powers under S. 28(2) of the Act nor the conditions subsequent thereto appear to have been fulfilled. Consequently, relying upon the aforesaid two decisions of this Hon'ble Court, I am of the view that the impugned memo (being annexure 'F' to the writ application) as well as the order of the President of the Board conveyed therein both must be held to be invalid for the reasons as aforesaid and thus are set aside. The matter is referred back to the Board for disposing of the matter in terms of the earlier decisions of this Hon'ble Court as referred to above within 8 (eight) weeks from the date of communication of this order and the time limit so fixed above is peremptory and mandatory. 6. Till such disposal, status quo as on today shall continue. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. There would be no order as to costs. 7. Let a plain copy of this order counter-signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court) be given to the learned advocates for the parties. Application allowed.