JUDGMENT By the Court.—The present Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 13.5.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23973 of 2008. Sri Rameshwar Prasad Girls Higher Secondary School, Rasra, District Ballia, is an institution recognized under the provisions of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The Committee of Management of the institution is constituted in accordance with the approved scheme of administration. Rival set of elections were set up by the contesting parties. Petitioners pleaded elections of the year 2003 and 2006 while respondent No. 5 claimed to have held elections of the Committee of Management on 16.1.2005. 2. The matter came up before this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25442 of 2007. The said writ petition was allowed by the judgment and order dated 25.5.2007 subject to the observations made in the said order. Relevant portion of the said order is reproduced below : “Let the Regional Level Committee re-examine the legality of the elections pleaded by the parties afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and after permitting exchange of documents, strictly in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned speaking order, preferably within six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before the Regional Joint Director of Education who is the Chairman of the Regional Level Committee. This Court may clarify that no unnecessary adjournment shall be granted to any of the parties. The present writ petition is allowed subject to the observations made above.” 3. Pursuant to the said order dated 25.5.2007, the Regional Level Committee re-examined the matter and passed a detailed order dated 8.2.2008 whereby the election held by the respondent No. 5 on 16.1.2005 was declared to be legal and valid. 4. Against the said order dated 8.2.2008 passed by the Regional Level Committee, the petitioners/appellants filed the aforesaid Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23973 of 2008. By the judgment and order dated 13.5.2008, the learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition. Relevant portion of the said judgment and order dated 13.5.2008 is as follows : “The Committee of Management of respondent No. 5 is already elected and has been recognized. Signatures of respondent No. 5 have been attested, hence no interference at this stage is called for as no illegality has been shown in the impugned order. Relevant portion of the said judgment and order dated 13.5.2008 is as follows : “The Committee of Management of respondent No. 5 is already elected and has been recognized. Signatures of respondent No. 5 have been attested, hence no interference at this stage is called for as no illegality has been shown in the impugned order. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the findings of fact recorded in the impugned order, he has an alternative efficacious remedy by way of a suit where matter can be adjudicated on the basis of evidence adduced by the parties. With the above observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.” 5. We have heard Shri Sudhakar Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioners/appellants, Shri Gajendra Pratap, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 5 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4 and perused the record. 6. Learned Counsel for the parties agree that the Appeal itself may be disposed of at this stage without calling for any counter-affidavit. 7. Having considered the submission made by the learned Counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that no purpose would be served by entering into the legality of the order passed by the Regional Level Committee dated 8.2.2008, as also to examine the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the petitioners/appellants inasmuch as the term of the Committee recognised under the said order has already expired. 8. During the course of hearing it has come to the notice of the Court that the term of the respondent No. 5, Committee of Management elected on 16.1.2005 could last only for three years and one month and, therefore, the said term expired on the expiry of one month from 16.1.2008. Clause (4) of the Scheme of Administration provides as follows : “Prabandh Samiti Ke Koi Bhi Sadasya Ek Dusre Ke Sambandhi Nahin Honge. Prabandh Samiti Ka.......: Ka Sambandhi Shabd Ka Arth.................J0 Ki Madhyamik Shiksha Adhiniyam Ke Adhyaya 3 Viniyam 4 Mein Diya Gaya Hai. Padadhikari Evam Samiti Ke Sadasyon Ka Karyakal Teen Varsh Ka Hoga. Karya Avadhi Samapt Ho Jane Per Ek Mah Tak Hi Padadhikari Bane Reh Sakenge. Prabandh Samiti Ka.......: Ka Sambandhi Shabd Ka Arth.................J0 Ki Madhyamik Shiksha Adhiniyam Ke Adhyaya 3 Viniyam 4 Mein Diya Gaya Hai. Padadhikari Evam Samiti Ke Sadasyon Ka Karyakal Teen Varsh Ka Hoga. Karya Avadhi Samapt Ho Jane Per Ek Mah Tak Hi Padadhikari Bane Reh Sakenge. Yadi Teen Varsh Ke Bad Ek Mah Ke Andar Nav Chayanit Samiti Karyabhar Grahan Nahi Karti To Teen Varsh Ek Mah Ke Bad Kaalateet Samiti Ka Karyakram Sthal Samapt Samjha Jayega Aur Sambhagiya Shiksha Up Nideshak Dwara Manoneet Ek Vyakti Prabandh Sanchalak Karyarat Mana Jayega Jise Prabandadhikaran Ke Purna Adhikar Honge. Yadi Prabandh Sanchalak Nav Chayanit Samitiyon Mein Adhikar Ka Dawa Hai To Jiske Paksh Mein Sambhagiya Shiksha Up Nideshak Ka Nirnnay Ho To Use Karyarat Karayega.” 9. This clause thus provides that the term of Committee of Management would be three years. After the expiry of three years the office bearers could continue for a further period of one month. In case within the period of one month after expiry of three years, the newly constituted committee does not take charge then the existing Committee of Management would cease to function and the Regional Joint Director of Education would nominate a person to act as Prabandh Sanchalak who would enjoy all the powers of the Committee of Management. In case there is any dispute regarding the newly constituted Committee of Management, the same would be decided by the Regional Joint Director of Education. 10. In view of the above Clause (4) of the Scheme of Administration, there is no doubt that the term of the Committee of Management elected on 16.1.2005 expired on 16.1.2008 and it could continue only for a further period of one month. 11. Shri Gajendra Pratap, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 5 at this stage submitted that fresh elections of the Committee of Management were held on 16.1.2008 and the papers have been forwarded to the Regional Level Committee for its approval. 12. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the Committee of Management elected on 16.1.2005 could not continue after expiry of three years and one month from the date of election as mentioned above. 12. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the Committee of Management elected on 16.1.2005 could not continue after expiry of three years and one month from the date of election as mentioned above. As regards the newly constituted committee said to be elected on 16.1.2008 relevant material has not been brought on record as to whether elections were held in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration and as to whether the said elections were valid or not and as to whether the alleged newly constituted committee took charge within the period contemplated in Clause IV of the Scheme of Administration. 13. In the circumstances we are of the considered opinion that it would be appropriate that the Regional Level Committee should examine the said questions. 14. Therefore, without entering into the correctness of the judgment and order dated 13.5.2008 passed by the learned single Judge as also the order dated 8.2.2008 passed by the Regional Level Committee, we request the Regional Level Committee to examine the legality of the elections allegedly held on 16.2.2008 as also the right of elected Committee to continue in office as per the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. 15. The Regional Level Committee will proceed to decide the matter after giving opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. 16. Special Appeal stands disposed of. ————