JUDGMENT Hon’ble Arun Tandon, J.—Service upon respondent No. 5 is deemed sufficient in view of the office report dated 19th May, 2010 under Chapter VIII Rule 12 of the High Court Rules. Nobody is present on behalf of respondent No. 5. 2. Heard Sri Y.K. Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 and learned Standing Counsel for State-respondents. 3. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties present. The present writ petition is being disposed finally with the consent of the parties. 4. Sri Swami Shivanand Saraswati Higher Secondary School, Thathia, Kannauj is an institution recognised under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The provisions of U.P. Secondary Education (Services Selection Boards) Act, 1982 and those of U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 are fully applicable to the teachers of the said institution. 5. The disputes with regard to the lawful management of the institution has been engaging the attention of this Court time and again. Suffice is to refer• to the order passed by the-Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 848 of 2006 Committee of Management and another v. State of U.P. and others, dated 22nd July, 2007, wherein the Division Bench after setting aside the judgment and order dated 11th April, 2008 dismissed the Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45684 of 2007, which was directed against an order of the Regional Level Committee dated 12th September, 2007 recognizing the elections of the Committee of Management headed by Shree Krishna Yadav dated 15th December, 2006. The writ petition was restored to its original number and liberty was granted to the parties to obtain such further interim order in the pending writ petitions, as they may be advised. Operative portion of the Division Bench Judgment reads as follows: “In these circumstances and in view of the fact that issues, which have been raised in the writ petition and which have been recorded hereinabove have not been adverted to by the Hon’ble Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition under the impugned judgment and order dated 11th April, 2008, we are of the considered opinion that interest of substantial justice would be served by setting aside that the judgment and order dated 11th April, 2008 and the Writ Petition No. 45684 of 2007 being restored to its original number. It is ordered accordingly. We further direct that all the writ petitions as detailed herein above shall be tagged and listed alongwith Writ Petition No. 45684 of 2007 before the appropriate Bench at the earliest possible and be decided together. We further make it open to both the parties to seek such interim protection as they may be advised in the pending writ petitions before the Hon’ble Single Judge. It is made clear that any observation made herein above shall not prejudice any of the rights of the parties. The special appeal is disposed of accordingly. “ 6. Reference is also made to the orders passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46315 of 2008 wherein the order of the. District Inspector of Schools dated 14th August, 2008 attesting the signatures of Tej Singh Kannaujiya has been stayed by the Writ Court and the Special Appeal No. 1193 of 2008 filed against the said order has been .disposed of ,and the attestation of signatures of Tej Singh Kannaujiya has been kept in abeyance. 7. It is admitted to the parties that no interim order has been granted in writ petition 45684 of 2007 after its restoration by the Hon’ble Single Judge. As a logical consequence thereto, the order dated 12th September, 2007 recognizing the elections of the Committee of Management with Shree Krishna Yadav as the Manager continues to exist on record. Therefore, in the opinion of the Court, so long as the order dated 12th September, 2007 is not stayed or set aside by the Court. the Management recognised thereunder alone has the competence to manage the institution as well as to hold future elections. 8. This Court may also refer to the order passed in Special Appeal No. 1807 of 2008, wherein the Division Bench after setting aside the order of single operation of account required the District Inspector of Schools to examine as to whether the Committee of Management with Sree Krishna Yadav as Manager or the Committee of Management with Sri Tej Singh Kannaujiya as Manager was entitled to manage the affairs of the institution in light of the various orders passed by the Writ Court as noticed above. The District Inspector of Schools under the order dated 6th March, 2009 held that the Committee of Management with Sri Tej Singh Kannaujiya as Manager was entitled to manage the affairs of the institution. This order has been subject to challenge by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22408 of 2009, wherein an order of status quo has been granted by the Court on 11th May, 2009. It is stated that the interim order passed in the said writ petition continues to be operative even today. 9. It is in this factual background that the Court is called upon to examine the legality of the order passed by the Regional Level Committee in its meeting .dated 3rd July, 2009 approving the alleged appointment of Sri Hari Om Sharan Katiyar i.e. respondent No. 5 as assistant clerk in the Institution. 10. This Court may record that papers pertaining to the selections of Hari Om Sharan Katiyar were transmitted to the Regional Level Committee by the District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 10th January, 2006, The Regional Level Committee vide order dated 11th June, 2007 refused to accord approval to the said appointment on the ground that the position of Committee of Management with Sri Tej Singh Kannaujiya as Manager was doubtful. This order dated 11th June, 2007 was neither challenged by the Committee of Management nor by the Hari Om Sharan Katiyar. However, it appears that the Regional Level Committee, after nearly two years of the said order, on a letter forwarded by the District Inspector of Schools, reconsidered the entire matter vide order dated 4th July, 2009, only on the ground that elections of the Committee of Management with Sri Tej Singh Kannaujiya as Manager were approved by the Regional Level Committee on 17th January, 2007 and that his signatures were attested on 20th January, 2007. It has proceeded to hold that the appointment made on the post of Assistant Clerk in the institution by the said Committee of Management, as communicated under the letter of the District Inspector of Schools dated 10th January, 2006 were made by the lawful Committee of Management and since the appointment has been made after advertisement and on the recommendation of the Selection Committee constituted a decision has been taken to approve the appointment for a payment of salary from the State exchequer. 11. 11. The order passed by the Regional Level Committee on the face of it is totally arbitrary for following reasons : (a) the order dated 11th June, 2007 has not been challenged before any competent Court of law and had become final and there was no occasion for the Regional Level Committee to review the said decision dated 11th June, 2007. Even otherwise, the recognition granted on 17th January, 2007 to the Committee of Management is admittedly nearly one year subsequent to the alleged date on which the papers were forwarded qua selection on the post of Assistant Clerk under the letter of the District Inspector of Schools to be precise dated 10th January, 2006. This Court fails to understand that as to how recognition granted to the elections dated 10th January, 2007 can infuse the life into the selections which took place in the year 2006 or even prior to it, how could the Regional Level Committee hold that the selections have been held by the competent Committee of Management, when the approve is being granted in January, 2007 i.e. after nearly one year of the alleged date of selections. (b) The Regional Level Committee under its order dated 12th September, 2007 had recalled the order dated 17th January, 2007 recognizing the Committee of Management with Tej Singh Kannaujiya as the Manager and approved the Committee of Management with Sree Krishna Yadav as the manager. This order is under challenge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45684 of 2007 filed by Sree Tej Singh Kannaujiya himself and admittedly in the said writ petition, no interim order is in operation. The impact of the judgment and order of the Division Bench of this Court in Special Anneal No. 848 of 2008 as noticed above and there being no interim order in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 45684 of 2007 has completely been ignored by the Regional Level Committee for the reasons best known to it. (c) It may further be noticed that except for recording that the vacancy was advertised and the Selection Committee was constituted, the Regional Level Committee has not cared to examine as to what procedure had been followed and as to whether the constitution of the Selection Committee was in accordance with the provisions/Government Order applicable or not. 12. (c) It may further be noticed that except for recording that the vacancy was advertised and the Selection Committee was constituted, the Regional Level Committee has not cared to examine as to what procedure had been followed and as to whether the constitution of the Selection Committee was in accordance with the provisions/Government Order applicable or not. 12. Such deliberate ignorance/non-consideration of the material facts before approving the alleged selections cannot be approved of by this Court. This Court in the case of Principal, Adarsh Inter College, Umari Bijnor v. State of U.P. and others, 2010 (1) ADJ 403 , which has been approved vide Division Bench Judgment and order of this Court dated 3rd December, 2009 passed in Special Appeal No. 1851 of 2009 (Principal, Adarsh Intermediate College, Umari v. State of U.P. and others), wherein it has been held that the Government Order dated 11th May, 2001 for regulating the process of recruitment is binding and has statutory force. This Court may also record that the Regional Level Committee has also not ensured the compliance of Regulation 106 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 before approving the appointments. 13. The Court may not express final opinion in the matter at this stage of the proceedings, inasmuch as it was upon the Regional Level Committee to examine all aspect of the matter which it has failed to do so. 14. I am of the considered opinion that the Regional Level Committee for unexplained reasons has given a go bye to the various aspect of the matters, which did need examination before approving the selection including the competence to review the earlier order dated 11th June, 2007. 15. Because of such illegal order of the Regional Level Committee, uncalled for litigation has been generated and the issue which was lying closed, since passing of the order dated 11th June, 2007 has again been made alive because of the illegal order of the Regional Level Committee dated 3/4th July, 2009. In these set of circumstances, this Court feels that not only the decision of the Regional Level Committee dated 3/4th July, 2009 is liable to be quashed for the reasons recorded herein• above, the Regional Level Committee has to be saddled with exceptional cost. 16. In these set of circumstances, this Court feels that not only the decision of the Regional Level Committee dated 3/4th July, 2009 is liable to be quashed for the reasons recorded herein• above, the Regional Level Committee has to be saddled with exceptional cost. 16. Accordingly, the decision of the Regional Level Committee dated 3rd July, 2009 as communicated under the letter of the Regional Joint Director of Education dated 4th July, 2009 is hereby quashed. The writ petition is allowed with cost of Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the Regional Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Region, Kanpur, who is the Chairman of the Regional Level Committee to the petitioner by way of bank draft within one month from today, failing which the same shall be recovered by the District Magistrate, Kanpur from the Joint Director of Education as arrears of land revenue to be paid to the petitioner. 17. At this stage, learned counsel for respondent No. 4 points out that against the recognition as well as attestation of signatures of the Committee of Management with Sri Tej Singh Kannaujiya dated 2nd December, 2009, Committee of Management with Sree Krishna Yadav filed writ petition No. 8498 of 2010, which has since been dismissed and the matter has been referred to the Regional Level Committee. He submits that petitioner is a rank outsider and has no locus to file• the present writ petition. He further points out that in view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Dharam Raj v. State of U.P. and others, 2009 (108) RD 689, petitioner cannot be said to be an aggrieved person and therefore the writ petition filed by him is not maintainable at his behest. 18. The contention so raised on behalf of respondent No. 4 has only been stated to be rejected. The Committee of Management with Sri Krishna Yadav claiming itself to be the lawful management, has a right to object to the appointment made in the institution by a rival Committee of Management which according to the petitioner has no right to either manage the institution or to make appointment. Petitioner has therefore, sufficient cause to maintain the present writ petition and is an aggrieved party. ————