Hon’ble V.K. Shukla,J.—The facts of the case reflect that one Sudarshan Kumar had been performing and discharging duties as Manager of the Committee of Management of Kisan Inter College, Madhi, District Meerut. Against the said incumbent, it appears that no confidence motion had been passed on 22.05.2011; one Yogendra Singh had been elected as Manager for the remainder periodýÿ and the papers were forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools for attesting the signature of Yogendra Singh. After the said action had been taken, it is reflected from the record that Sudarshan Kumar made complaint to the District Magistrate contending therein that without undertaking any exercise whatsoever quite illegally he has been removed through a concocted no confidence motion and Yogendra Singh has been transplanted as Manager. After the said complaint was made, the District Magistrate forwarded the matter to the Joint Director of Education asking him to enquire into the matter and submit report. The Joint Director of Education thereafter asked the parties concerned to participate in the enquiry to be undertaken for submission of report. 2. It has been sought to be contended on behalf of the petitioners that the District Magistrate has no role to play in the affairs of the Intermediate Colleges under the provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. It is only when there is law and order problem in the institution, then the District Magistrate can intervene to the extent of bringing law and order situation in control. 3. From the side of respondents, it has been contended that in the present case complaint had been made before the District Magistrate, who seeing the gravity of the matter has asked the Joint Director of Education to enquire into the matter and submit report, as such no prejudice has been caused to the petitioner. 4. After respective arguments have been advanced, factual situation which has emerged in the present case is that resolution had been passed on 22.05.2001 wherein motion of no confidence was passed against Sudarshan Kumar and Yogendra Kumar had been elected as Manager for the remainder period. Under the scheme of administration against the resolution of no confidence motion so passed, remedy of appeal is provided for, but accepted position is that no appeal has been preferred against the motion of no confidence, rather complaint has been made before the District Magistrate. Under the scheme of administration against the resolution of no confidence motion so passed, remedy of appeal is provided for, but accepted position is that no appeal has been preferred against the motion of no confidence, rather complaint has been made before the District Magistrate. As far as District Magistrate is concerned, in regard to running of an educational institutionýÿ under the provisions of U.P. Act No. 2 of 1921, he has no role to play. In such a situation and in this background as far as the first part of the order passed by the District Magistrate asking the Joint Director of Education for getting the matter enquired is not being interfered with, but the second part directing him to submit the report to him is not being approved of. Under the Government Order dated 19.12.2000 Regional Committee headed by the Regional Joint Director of Education is fully competent to hold enquiry and take decision in the matter. Once it has been alleged by Sudarshan Kumar large scale manipulations and manoeuvrings have been done in the matter and no confidence motion has been referred to the Regional Committee, the Regional Committee in view of the Government Order dated 19.12.2000 is fully competent to take decision in such matters. 5. Consequently, in the facts of the case, the Regional Committee headed by Joint Director of Education, Ist Region, Meerut is directed to examine the matter and take approporiate decisioin in accordance with law. It is clarified that the District magistrate has no role to play in the matter. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. _____________