S. K. SINGH, J. ( 1 ) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1, the District Inspector of Schools, Moradabad, to attest the signature of petitioner No. 2 as Manager of the committee of management on the basis of the election held on 14. 9. 1997. A further prayer has been made that the letter dated 11. 9. 1997 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) as issued by the respondent No. 1 be also quashed. ( 2 ) WHEN the matter was taken up, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that this writ petition, by lapse of time, has become infructuous as the term of the committee of management as provided under the Scheme of Administration is 3 years and thereafter, for 1 month, the office-bearers of the old committee can continue and, therefore, according to the learned counsel for the respondents, the election in which the petitioners claim to have been elected being of the year 1997, no relief can be granted to the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed before the Court Clause 8 and Sub-clause 4 of clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration which has been annexed as Annexure-1 along with the impleadment application by Sri Daman Singh and others. The aforesaid Clause 8 and Sub-clause (4) of Clause 9 for convenience is hereby reproduced as under :. . (VERNACULAR MATTER OMMITED ). . ( 3 ) IN view of the aforesaid preliminary objection, matter was heard on this issue. For deciding the aforesaid preliminary issue as to whether the writ petition has become infructuous as argued by learned counsel for the respondents, a reference to certain facts will be necessary which come out from the narration of the facts as have been pleaded in the writ petition. ( 4 ) THE last election of the previous committee of management was held on 12. 3. 1994. The term being 3 years, it was to continue upto 11th March, 1997 and as fresh election to constitute the committee of management could not take place within 1 month of the expiry of the term of out going committee of management, the D. I. O. S. , by order dated 6. 5. 1997. 3. 1994. The term being 3 years, it was to continue upto 11th March, 1997 and as fresh election to constitute the committee of management could not take place within 1 month of the expiry of the term of out going committee of management, the D. I. O. S. , by order dated 6. 5. 1997. appointed the respondent No. 2 as authorised controller of the college as contemplated under the Scheme of administration with a direction to hold elections of the new committee of management within a period of 6 months. The authorised controller took charge of the affairs of the college on 7th march, 1997 and with a purpose to hold the elections, wrote a letter on 2. 9. 1997 to the District inspector of Schools for according permission to hold election. On that very day, 2 other letters were written by him to the D. I. O. S. by which, he gave information about the appointment of respondent No. 3 as Election Officer and requested that if the department wants to appoint an observer, that may be made. The D. I. O. S. by his letter dated 3. 9. 1997. In reference to the letters of the authorised controller dated 2. 9. 1997, granted permission according approval to the nomination of the 3rd respondent as Election Officer with a further direction for the publication of notice of the elections in the daily news paper. It has been stated that after due publication, ultimately elections took place on 14. 9. 1997, upon which the Election Officer sent information about the proceedings of the elections to the D. I. O. S. on 14. 9. 1997, itself. It is said that the president of the committee of management so elected per information of the Election Officer dated 14. 9. 1997, also wrote to the D. I. O. S. for attesting the signature of the petitioner No. 2. Inquiry was made from the office of D. I. O. S. upon which it was revealed that signature was not attested because of the reason that a letter was already sent from the office of the respondent No. 1 on 11. 9. 1997, although same was never received by the Election Officer, for staying the election which was to take place on 14. 9. 1997. 9. 1997, although same was never received by the Election Officer, for staying the election which was to take place on 14. 9. 1997. It is by this action on the part of the D. I. O. S. i. e. , (i) of not taking any decision in respect to the election which was held on 14. 9. 1997 as informed by the Election Officer and (ii) the letter dated 11. 9. 1997 for staying the election, petitioners feeling aggrieved, has filed this writ petition. ( 5 ) IT has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that in the fact situation of the case stated supra, term of the committee of management never commenced and, therefore, this writ petition has not become infructuous, It has been submitted on the basis of the Sub-clause (4) of clause 9 of the scheme of administration that handing over of charge by authorised controller to the newly elected committee is also dependent upon the fact that the report about the election has to be approved by the D. I. O. S, and it is to that committee as approved by the D. I. O. S. that the charge is to be handed over. ( 6 ) THE question that calls for determination is as to whether term of committee of management elected on 14. 9. 1997 commenced on the date of election and expired automatically on expiry of prescribed period of 3 years and 1 month. ( 7 ) SECTION 16a (1) of U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, provides that there shall be a scheme of Administration for every institution. The Scheme of Administration as provided in section 16a (1) shall, amongst other matters, provide for constitution of a committee of management vested with the authority to manage and to conduct the affairs of the institution. The Act, however, does not provide as to what would be the duration/term of the committee of management in accordance with the Scheme of Administration. The 3rd Schedule to the Act which contains principle on which the Scheme of Administration shall be accorded approval, visualises that every Scheme of Administration shall provide, inter alia, for the procedure for constitution of the committee of management, the qualification and dis-qualification of the members, and office-bearers of the committee of management and the term of their office. The 3rd Schedule to the Act which contains principle on which the Scheme of Administration shall be accorded approval, visualises that every Scheme of Administration shall provide, inter alia, for the procedure for constitution of the committee of management, the qualification and dis-qualification of the members, and office-bearers of the committee of management and the term of their office. Clause 8 of the approved Scheme of Administration in the present case, provides that the term of the committee of management shall be 3 years and if a newly constituted committee of management does not take charge of the affairs of the Institution within a month thereafter, the office-bearers of the committee of management of which the term has expired will cease to function. Clause 8 of the Scheme of Administration, reliance on which has been placed by learned counsel for the respondents, is, however, silent about the date of commencement of the prescribed term of the committee of management. It visualises of a situation where there exists a recognised committee of management and its term expired with no new commtttee of management to take charge within 1 month after expiration of the term. It does not comprehend a situation where the affairs of the institution is conducted by the authorised controller who holds election but does not hand over charge to the newly constituted committee of management in the absence of order passed by the D. I. O. S. according recognition to the newly constituted committee of management. In such a situation 3 years term of the committee of management will commence w. e. f. the date of taking over the charge within a reasonable time after recognition. The expression ^^blds ipkr~ gh og ,d izca/k lfefr fo|ky; esigyh lfefr dk dk;zdky lekir gksus ij dk;zhkkj xzg. kdjsxh** used in Clause 9 (4) is significant. A conjoint reading of Clauses 8 and 9 (4) of the Scheme of administration also leads to the conclusion that it is the date of assumption of the office, i. e. , relevant for the purpose of commencement of the term of the committee of management. It would be preposterous to hold, in the instant case that the term of the committee of management expired or lapsed by efflux of time even though it could not commence as yet. ( 8 ) IN Committee of Management v. Dy. It would be preposterous to hold, in the instant case that the term of the committee of management expired or lapsed by efflux of time even though it could not commence as yet. ( 8 ) IN Committee of Management v. Dy. Director of Education and others, (1991) 2 UPLBEC 1183, a question arose as what would be the date which can be said to be the date of commencement of term of committee of management. A Division Bench of this Court held as under : ". . . . . we find that there is nothing fn the Act. Rules or under the Scheme of Administration. However, we feel after perusing the Scheme of Administration, the various provisions of the Act and the Rules that its period mould start running either from the date of election validly held where the period of earlier committee of management has already come to an end prior to this date and there being no dispute or from the date the elected committee of management takes over the charge of the management. " ( 9 ) IT would appear from the observation aforestated that the Division Bench was of the view that depending on fact /situation of each case, the term of the committee of management would start running either from the date of election validly held or from date the committee of management takes over charge of the management. ( 10 ) IN Committee of Management v. Dy. Director of Education and others, 1995 ID UPLBEC 149, a Division Bench of this Court was seized of a similar matter. After referring the decision of the Division Bench in aforestated case (1991) 2 UPLBEC 1183 (supra), the Court held as under : . . . . . . . . . . It is true that it is mentioned in the Scheme of Administration of the College that papers of the election will be submitted before the D. I. O. S. who will recognise the committee, if he is satisfied from the perusal of the record. But the scheme further says that the committee so elected shall take over charge after the expiry of the term of the outgoing committee. But the scheme further says that the committee so elected shall take over charge after the expiry of the term of the outgoing committee. Taking over charge of the college by the newly elected committee is not dependent on the recognition by the D. I. O. S. The term of the newly elected committee begins immediately on the expiry of the term of the outgoing committee and if the committee of management is not elected before the expiry of the term of the outgoing committee. " ( 11 ) IN both the cases aforementioned, it was held that commencement of the term of the committee of management was not dependent on attestation of signature by the D. I. O. S. but at the same time, the Court did recognise that the term of the committee in a given case may begirt to run from the date, the elected committee of management takes over charge of the management. It would depend upon the facts of each case that whether term of committee of management will begin from the date of election or from the date of taking over charge. In a case where the affairs of the college are managed by the committee which holds the elections in accordance with the scheme of administration, before expiry of its term, the newly elected committee of management will begin to run not from the date of election but from the date of taking over charge of the management after expiry of the term of the outgoing committee. In the present case, affairs of the college were being managed by the authorised controller and it was he who held election on 14. 9. 1997 but did not hand over the charge to the petitioners committee in view of the fact that no express order was passed by the D. I. O. S. approving the petitioners committee of management. The D. I. O. S. did not recall the authorised controller and rather allowed him to continue even after the election. A reading of para 9 (4) of the Scheme of administration suggests that newly elected committee of management will take over charge only after it is recognised by the D. I. O. S. The arguments of Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior advocate that the term of the committee elected on 14. 9. A reading of para 9 (4) of the Scheme of administration suggests that newly elected committee of management will take over charge only after it is recognised by the D. I. O. S. The arguments of Sri Ashok Khare, learned senior advocate that the term of the committee elected on 14. 9. 1997, automatically expired on expiration of prescribed period of 3 years and 1 month is based on misconstruction of Scheme of administration. In my considered opinion, para 8 of the Scheme of Administration provides for automatic expiration of term of existing committee of management in case newly elected committee does not take charge within extended period of 1 month after expiration of 3 years term of the committee of management. It does not apply to a case where, the elected committee of management is seeking its recognition and the affairs of the institution are conducted by authorised controller. ( 12 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits and, in my opinion rightly, that admittedly the d. I. O. S. has not passed any order either way in respect to the election, report about which was sent on 14. 9. 1997, by the Election Officer and, therefore, the contention that the term of the committee has expired on completion of 3 years term cannot be accepted. The election was conducted by the authorised controller and it was for the D. I. O. S. to take a decision by passing a specific reasoned order, disapproving the election in the event of there being any infirmity or even on the ground that he had stayed the election for the reasons stated in the letter dated 11. 9. 1997. ( 13 ) IN the decision cited by learned counsel for the respondents, i. e. , Committee of Management v. Dy. Director of Education (supra), it has been said that taking over charge of the affairs of the college by the newly elected committee is not dependent on the recognition by the D. I. O. S. To my mind, that decision will apply in a situation where the committee has taken over charge of the affairs of the college on a particular date and in the meantime, for any intervention at the level of D. I. O. S. or otherwise, management was interrupted. In such situation, it will be deemed that after running out the period of 3 years, the term of that committee will cease. But so far as present case is concerned, the election was conducted by the authorised controller, and admittedly, petitioners could never come into the control of the affairs of the college for a single moment and it is the authorised controller who under law, as well as fact has been continuing. It cannot, therefore, be said that the term of the committee has run away, which admittedly never came into existence. ( 14 ) IN my opinion, a distinction has to be drawn in the situation where the election was conducted by the authorised controller and in respect thereto no decision has been taken by the d. I. O. S. either way and the term of the committee never commenced due to the reason that charge was never given by authorised controller and, therefore, the prescribed duration cannot be said to have expired. The authorised controller was appointed by the D. I. O. S. and the petitioners cannot be penalised for the fault of the authorised controller or for the fault of the D. I. O. S. In not passing any specific order. The construction, which leads to absurdity and injustice, should be avoided. The Court must adopt an interpretation, i. e. , just, reasonable and sensible, rather than which leads to unjust and absurd results. It would never have been intended by the framers of the scheme of Administration that the term of the committee of management would expire even though the same never commenced due to the fault of either the authorised controller or the d. I. O. S. ( 15 ) IN view of the aforesaid premises, I feel persuaded to take the view that this writ petition cannot be held to have become infructuous and the claim of the petitioners is liable to be examined on merits. ( 16 ) LIST on 14th August, 2001, this matter for admission /final disposal. .