JUDGMENT N. K. Mehrotra, J.—This is a petition for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision dated 21.7.2004 taken by the Committee headed by the opposite party No. 2 and also the order dated 22.7.2004, passed by the opposite party No. 4 as contained in Annexures-1 and 2 respectively to the writ petition and for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to allow the petitioners to continue as Committee of Management of Shri Bhairav Nath Uchchatar Madyhyamik Vidyalaya, Mau Gorpur, District Barabanki and also the Manager of the Committee of Management of the Institution and further for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioners as Committee of Management. 2. I have heard Shri H. G. S. Parihar, advocate for the petitioners and Shri G. S. L. Verma, advocate for the opposite party No. 5. 3. By the impugned order dated 21.7.2004 (Annexure-1) the Joint Director, Education, Faizabad Region, Faizabad, after exercising power under Section 16A (7) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to be as “Act”) has recognized the Committee of Management headed by Vijay Narayan Verma, the opposite party No. 5 and a direction has been issued to the District Inspector of Schools that the signatures of Shir Vijay Narayan Verma, the Manager of the duly elected committee be certified. 4. After hearing both the parties, it is established from the facts averred in the writ petition as well as the counter-affidavit that there is a dispute of election between the two Committees of Management ; one headed by Arvind Kishore Singh, the petitioner No. 2 and the other headed by Vijay Narayan Verma, the opposite party No. 5. The main grievance of the petitioner is that no opportunity of hearing was given before passing the impugned order as provided under Section 16A (7) of the Act. 5. It appears to me that in this writ petition, the determination of disputed question of fact shall be involved and the order of the Joint Director, Education, Faizabad Region, Faizabad under Section 16A (7) is always a temporary arrangement till the dispute of election between the two rival Committees of Management is decided by the court of competent jurisdiction. 5. It appears to me that in this writ petition, the determination of disputed question of fact shall be involved and the order of the Joint Director, Education, Faizabad Region, Faizabad under Section 16A (7) is always a temporary arrangement till the dispute of election between the two rival Committees of Management is decided by the court of competent jurisdiction. In this way there is always an alternative remedy available to the parties claiming themselves to be duly elected as Committee of Management to file the civil suit to establish their claim on the basis of their allegations. It appears that the scope of Section 16A (7) of the Act is to find out who is in effective control. Whether such effective control is by valid general election or not is immaterial since such dispute decided under Section 16A (7) of the Act is subject matter of determination by a court of competent jurisdiction. In Shandar Husain v. Deputy Director of Education XII, Region Moradabad and others, 1995 ACJ 1244, it has been held that the orders in the matter relating to grant of recognition of the Committee of Management are always subject to decision of civil court of competent jurisdiction. 6. In view of the above, I am not inclined to invoke the discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere in the impugned orders. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.