JUDGMENT Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—This is an appeal against the order dated 8.12.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 63078 of 2008, Rajeshwar Prasad Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others. 2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to the present appeal are that there is a college, named, as Sri Gandhi Vidyalaya Intermediate College, Kachhwa, District Mirzapur (hereinafter referred to as “institution”) a recognized Intermediate College and is under grant-in-aid. The provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) and Payment of Salaries Act, 1971 are applicable. The institution was established by a registered Society known as Sri Gandhi Vidyalaya Higher Secondary School, Kachhwa, Mirzapur (hereinafter referred to as “Society”). The Society has its own registered bye laws and the institution has its approved Scheme of Administration approved by the Deputy Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi. It appears that the Scheme of Administration was amended by the Deputy Director of Education, 5th Region, Varanasi w.e.f. January, 1985. It appears that on account of certain irregularities being found in the institution, State Government passed an order under Section 16-D of the Act, appointing an Authorized Controller in the institution in the year 1981 and since then, the Authorized Controller is continuing in the institution and no election on the basis of Scheme of Administration with valid members could be held for such a long time. 3. It appears that Writ Petitions were filed by one Sri Parmanand Dubey being Writ Petition No. 56441 of 2003 and by the alleged Committee of Management Sri Hari Mohan Singh being Writ Petition No. 3022 of 2004. Both the Writ Petitions were decided by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 1.10.2007 directing the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur to hold the election of Committee of Management of the institution in accordance with law as per approved Scheme of Administration within a period of two months from the date of production of certified copy of the order. It appears that to hold the valid election the process of preparation of voter list has been started by the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur. The petitioners-respondents filed the list of 35 members to be included in the voter list to be allowed to participate in the election. It appears that to hold the valid election the process of preparation of voter list has been started by the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur. The petitioners-respondents filed the list of 35 members to be included in the voter list to be allowed to participate in the election. Appellant and other life member filed a list of valid members before the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur and stated that there are only 9 life members of the institution, who alone are entitled to be allowed to participate in the election. It appears that Ex. District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur Smt. Malti Rai has included 35 members to be valid voters vide order dated 2.5.2008. However, it has been directed to the Authorized Controller that in case there would be any concealment in the averment of affidavit, which is found later, then membership shall not be held valid and further direction was given to hold the election after the varification of affidavit. Challenging the order of District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur dated 2.5.2008, Writ Petition No. 26346 of 2008 was filed. This Court vide order dated 28.5.2008 has directed the parties to exchange the affidavit. However observed that "learned counsel for the petitioner states that District Inspector of Schools has passed all order directing the Authorised Controller to examine the receipts and the affidavits. This Court has no reason to doubt that such a direction shall not be followed". Court further observed that the result of election shall be abide by the decision of the writ petition. It appears that in view of the judgment and observation of this Court dated 28.5.2008 passed in Writ Petition No. 26346 of 2008, Authorized Controller issued notices to the persons named in the order dated 2.5.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools Mirzapur to be present before him on 6.6.2008 so that their identity from the affidavits and the receipts filed by them may be verified. On 6.6.2008, Authorized Controller proceeded to make verification of the identity of members on the basis of their affidavits. It appears that during the course of verification some incident took place. On 6.6.2008, Authorized Controller proceeded to make verification of the identity of members on the basis of their affidavits. It appears that during the course of verification some incident took place. Therefore, the election programme was postponed and the Authorized Controller wrote letter to Joint Director of Education, Vindhyachal Region, Mirzapur as well as to the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur with a request that he is unable to hold the election, hence some other person may be appointed as Authorized Controller. On the basis of said report, election programme was postponed and Joint Director of Education appointed Sri Vijay Shanker Mishra as Authorized Controller to hold the election after verification of the identity of the members. Due to aforesaid reasons, the election scheduled for 14.6.2008 could not be held. The newly appointed Authorized Controller took the charge on 26.7.2008. The newly appointed Authorized Controller after taking over the charge proceeded to hold the election and for verification and the identity of the members with their affidavits and other documents fixed 31.10.2008. On that day, through vediography verification was done and by order dated 15.11.2008, the final list of members was approved and published by the Authorized Controller and with proper permission of the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur, he chalked out the election programme and published in the newspaper “Amar Ujala” and "Dainik Hindustan” on 27.11.2008 and 28.11.2008 respectively. As per the programme of election, nomination was to be started from 10.12.2008, scrutiny of the nomination was to be made on 10.12.2008, the withdrawal of the nomination on 10.12.2008 and in the case of contest, the date of voting was fixed on 12.12.2008. 4. Sri Rajeshwar Prasad Singh and others then filed Writ Petition No. 63078 of 2008 challenging the voter list approved by the Authorized Controller on 15.11.2008 and also prayed for holding election with the members as directed by the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur vide order dated 2.5.2008. In the said Writ Petition, following impugned order has been passed on 8.12.2008 : “Learned Standing Counsel has accepted notice for the respondents No. 1 to 3 and Sri Anil Bhushan for the respondent No. 6. They pray for and are granted a month’s time to file counter affidavit. The petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List immediately thereafter. They pray for and are granted a month’s time to file counter affidavit. The petitioner shall have two weeks thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List immediately thereafter. Issue notice to the respondents No. 4 and 5 fixing a date immediately after six weeks. On the next date, the respondent No. 5 shall file his personal affidavit explaining as to why the elections which were announced on 24.5.2008 had been postponed even when there was no interim order granted by the High Court and further when the said election was postponed then on what basis he has changed the list of members which were earlier found to be 46 life members and one founder member and now the list is of only 10 members. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, it is directed that the elections in pursuance of the order dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Authorized Controller shall remain stayed.” 5. Challenging the aforesaid order, present appeal has been preferred. 6. Heard Sri Nirvikar Gupta, Advocate assisted by Sri C.B. Dubey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Sri P.S. Baghel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos. 6 to 13. 7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that once the election process has been started, this Court should not interfere. He submitted that after the election being held it is always open to challenge the election on various grounds including the issue relating to the finalisation of the voter list at the time of approval by the Regional Level Committee and thus, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that the election process has been started in pursuance of the direction given by this Court; the voter list has been prepared after due consideration; after verification of their identity through their affidavits and other documents. Whether voter list finalized by the Authorized Controller was correct or not is a disputed question of fact which cannot be looked into by this Court in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and can only be looked into by the Court of fact; after the election being held, respondents will have every right to challenge the entire election before the Regional Level Committee on the ground of alleged irregularities in the preparation of the voter list. 8. 8. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decisions of this Court in the case of Basant Prasad Srivastava and others v. State of U.P. and others, (1993) 2 UPLBEC 1333; Committee of Management, Sri Radha Krishna Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and others v. Deputy Director of Education, (1950-91) 4 AlEC 155; R.P. Singh Baghel v. City Magistrate/Election Officer, 1998 (32) ALR 453; Committee of Management of Sri Prachar Vidhyapeeth Uchattar Madhyamik Vidyalayalaya, Samathar Etawah and another v. District Inspector of School, Etawah, (1995) 1 UPLBEC 51 ; Committee of Management, Pt. Jawahar LaI Krishak Inter College Mahuabari, Lar Road, Deoria and others v. Deputy Director of Education and others, (1996) 2 UPLBEC 1245 ; Tribhuwan Prasad at Present Manager Committee of Management, Keshav Ram Arya Adarsh Balika Higher Secondary School, Azamgarh v. Deputy Director of Education 1st, VIIth Region, Gorakhpur and others, 1996 (1) ESC 449 (All) and Committee of Management Brahmarshri Sri Ram Krishna Inter College, District Mau and another v. Inspector of Schools, Mau and others, (1999) 1 UPLBEC 461 . 9. Sri P.S. Baghel learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that the preparation of the voter list was patently illegal. He submitted that in compliance of the order dated 2.5.2008 and order dated 22.5.2008 passed by the District Inspector of Schools the election programme was declared on 24.5.2008 by the Prabandh Sanchalak on the basis of electoral college of 46 life members and one founder member and the date of election was fixed on 14.6.2008. He submitted that the said electoral programme was challenged by two persons, namely, Sri Gulab Dhar Pandey (present appellant) and Sri Lallan Dubey by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 26346 of 2008 and this Court has not granted interim order and it was directed that the result of the election shall abide by the decision in writ petition. The said writ petition is still pending before this Court. He submitted that prior to the election a notice was published on 29.5.2008 in the daily newspaper "Amar Ujala”. In the said notice the members were directed to deposit their photographs, certificate of date of birth, duly attested by second class Gazetted Officer before the Principal prior to 5.6.2008. In pursuance of the said notice, the petitioners have deposited all the required documents and affidavits etc. on 5.6.2008. In the said notice the members were directed to deposit their photographs, certificate of date of birth, duly attested by second class Gazetted Officer before the Principal prior to 5.6.2008. In pursuance of the said notice, the petitioners have deposited all the required documents and affidavits etc. on 5.6.2008. On 4.6.2008 a notice was published in the newspaper that all the life members of the college should reach the office of the Authorized Controller on 6.6.2008 at 11.00 a.m. i.e. within two days of the publication of the notice. When the petitioners reached the office of the Authorized Controller without looking into the paper of the petitioners, the election dated 14.6.2008 was postponed by the Authorized Controller for which a notice was published in the daily newspaper “Amar Ujala” on 8.6.2008 regarding the postponement of the election. Thereafter, on 25.10.2008 the Authorized Controller written a letter to one Sri Rajeshwar Prasad Singh, which was received by Sri Rajeshwar Prasad Singh on 29.10.2008 directing him to inform all the 35 members at his own level that they should reach the office of the Authorized Controller on 31.10.2008 along with their domicile certificate, age certificate and identity certificate issued by the Election Commission of India. He submitted that in such short notice, it was not possible for the members who were residing outside Mirzapur to appear. Further, on 29.10.2008 a public notice was issued to all the members of the General Body which was published in local newspaper of Mirzapur “Hindustan” where the members of General Body were informed to appear before him on 31.10.2008. He further submitted that in response to the aforesaid notice. Rajeshwar Prasad Singh could inform only 17 members who were local members and they filed affidavits regarding their membership along with their domicile certificate, identity card, certificate of date of birth etc. on 31.10.2008 before the Authorized Controller. The Authorized Controller without issuing any notice to the other members on wholly non-existent ground has accepted only 10 members and rejected the claim of all the 35 members who have been found to be genuine members by District Inspector of Schools by her order dated 2.5.2008 and 25.5.2008. The Authorized Controller has also rejected the membership of 17 person who were present on 31.10.2008. The Prabandh Sanchalak passed the order dated 15.11.2008 wherein only 10 members have been found genuine members. The Authorized Controller has also rejected the membership of 17 person who were present on 31.10.2008. The Prabandh Sanchalak passed the order dated 15.11.2008 wherein only 10 members have been found genuine members. The order dated 5.11.2008 passed by the Prabandh Sanchalak is without jurisdiction inasmuch he has travelled beyond his jurisdiction. The order of the Authorized Controller has been passed in flagrant violation of principle of natural justice and he has not given notice to all 35 members. 10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we have gone through the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, other documents annexed along with the writ petition and have given due consideration to the rival submissions. 11. Admittedly, the Authorised Controller was appointed in the year, 1981 and since then the election was not held. It was desirable that Committee of Management be formed to run the institution in accordance with the Scheme of Administration and therefore, having regard to this fact, this Court vide order dated 1st October, 2007 has directed the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur to hold the election of Committee of Management of the institution as per approved Scheme of Administration within a period of two months from the date of presentation of certified copy of the order. It appears that for one reason or the other, the election could not be held as directed by this Court. 12. Finally, the final list of the members was approved and published by the Authorized Controller and with the proper permission of the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur and published in the newspaper "Amar Ujala" and “Dainik Hindustan” on 27.11.2008 and 28,11.2008 respectively. As per the programme of election, nomination was to be started from 10.12.2008 scrutiny of the nomination was to be made on 10.12.2008, the withdrawal of the nomination to be made on 10.12.2008 and in the case of contest, the date of voting was fixed on 12.12.2008. 13. In the case of Basant Prasad Srivastava and another v. State of U.P. and another (supra), the Full Bench of this Court held as follows : “When once the election process starts, it must come to its logical conclusion. Once it comes to its logical conclusion by declaration of result of the election the aggrieved person may challenge the election by filing election petition or civil suit in accordance with law. Once it comes to its logical conclusion by declaration of result of the election the aggrieved person may challenge the election by filing election petition or civil suit in accordance with law. In such a proceeding the election may not be set aside if the alleged illegality or irregularity has not materially affected the result of the election. Approach to Court at intermediate stages in the election is bound to result in an office either remaining vacant or being occupied by a person whose entitlement to hold the office has ceased. Neither is a happy situation. It is, therefore, desirable that the election process should end as early as possible and the declaration of result should not be deferred through repeated interim orders passed from time to time.” 14. In the case of Committee of Management, Sri Radha Krishna Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya and others v. Deputy Director of Education, Gorakhpur and others (supra), the Division Bench of this Court held as follows : "There are large number of educational institution and the functioning of such institutions are controlled and managed by a Committee of Management. Such Committee is constituted under the rules, regulations or certain Administrative schemes. The term of such Committee of Management is limited by time. The election process inter alia involves the determination of the members who can vote and participate in the election, nomination, preparation and publication of programme, scrutiny and declaration of result. In case, at the intermediate stage of the election process the High Court entertains petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution it will further delay the election process. Secondly, the disputed question of fact as to who are the members and other related matters cannot be decided in the writ jurisdiction. A person who has any grievance can take recourse to the remedy provided under the Statute, Rules or Regulations or by filing suit in the competent Court of law.” 15. In the case of Committee of Management, Pt. Jawahar Lal Krishak Inter College Mahuabari, Lar Road, Deoria and others v. Deputy Director of Education and others (supra), learned Single Judge of this Court held as follows : “The question of validity of the election is dependant upon several factors including the validity and genuineness of the members inasmuch the election held with the help of invalid and fake members cannot be said to be valid election. Therefore, in any case, when the question arises as to whether the members who participated in the election were or were not the members of the general body, the Deputy Director of Education is under obligation to decide the said question before recording any finding on the question of validity of the election. The validity of election is to be determined in accordance with the provisions of Scheme of Administration.” 16. In the case of Tribhuwan Prasad at Present Manager Committee of Management, Keshav Ram Arya Adarsh Balika Higher Secondary School, Azamgarh v. Deputy Director of Education 1st, VIIth Region, Gorakhpur and others (supra), learned Single Judge of this Court held as follows : “List of members given by D.I.O.S. was made basis by authorized controller, concluded election of office bearers of Committee of Management. Representation of contesting opposite parties about incorrectness of list of members regarding exclusion of certain persons from becoming members not to be entertained once election process had already started—Held, D.I.O.S. not justified in passing orders during process of election. D.I.O.S. directed to pass appropriate orders about approval or disapproval of Committee of Management elected in the election conducted by authorized controller. The O.P. Pramod Gandhi or any other person, if aggrieved by the election held by the authorised controller, may seek such other legal remedy before the appropriate Civil Court for adjudication, about the validity of members of the Committee of Management, if so advised. Neither the D.I.O.S. nor the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is supposed to enter into the controversy about the genuineness, correctness and validity of list of members.” 17. This Court has consistently held that once the election process has been started this Court should not interfere. If any party has any grievance about the finalization of the voter list or about the voter list, it is always open to such person to challenge the same in the appropriate proceeding, namely, under the statute, Rules or Regulations or by filing suit in the Competent Court of law. Therefore, we are of the view that after the declaration of the election programme, interference by this Court is wholly unjustified. After the order dated 2.5.2008 passed by the Ex. District Inspector of Schools the issue relating to voter list had not become final. Therefore, we are of the view that after the declaration of the election programme, interference by this Court is wholly unjustified. After the order dated 2.5.2008 passed by the Ex. District Inspector of Schools the issue relating to voter list had not become final. The order of the District Inspector of Schools was subject to further scrutiny and verification and in pursuance thereof, the process of verification was started by the Authorized Controller. Such further proceeding has not been challenged by the petitioners-respondents rather petitioners-respondents submitted before the Authorized Controller for the purpose of verification. Therefore, it cannot be said that process started for the finalization of the voter list after 2.5.2008 was not justified. However, it is always open to the petitioners-respondents to challenge the voter list after the election in an appropriate proceeding, referred herein above. 18. In the result, Special Appeal is allowed. The impugned order dated 8th December, 2008 passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and Writ Petition No. 63078 of 2009, Rajeshwar Prasad Singh and others v. State of U.P. and others stand dismissed. The Authorized Controller is directed to issue election programme from the date from where the election process has been stayed within a period of two weeks by all means and hold the election on the basis of impugned voter list within a period of two months by all means. There shall be no order as to costs. ————