By The Court—Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned Single Judge by the judgment and order dated 08.07.2011 allowed the Writ Petition filed by the respondent no.1 and after quashing the order dated 12.10.2009 directed that the matter be proceeded with in accordance with law from the stage of the order of the District Inspector of Schools, Basti dated 20.8.2009. 3. Certain dispute with regard to the list of members and with regard to the term of the Committee of Management had been continuing interse parties. Without referring to the previous litigation, we may note that the Regional Committee found the claim of the petitioner (respondent in this appeal) to be valid vide order dated 12.12.2008. The said order dated 12.12.2008 was challenged by way of Writ Petition no.66257 of 2008 by the present appellant. The said Writ Petition was allowed by the learned Single judge by order dated 14.7.2009 with a direction to the District Inspector of School to hold elections of the Manager of the Committee of the College. Pursuant to the order of the learned Single Judge the District Inspector of Schools passed an order fixing 23.8.2009 as the date for elections of the Committee of Management and appointed the Associate District Inspector of Schools, Basti as the Election Officer. The Election Officer published the election schedule on 10.8.2009 fixing 23.08.2009 as the date for holding the elections. Certain objections were raised before the District Inspector of Schools on which, by order dated 20.8.2009 he stayed the election schedule fixed for 23.8.2009. 4. The present appellant filed Writ Petition No.44223 of 2009 challenging the order dated 20.8.2009 of the District Inspector of Schools staying the elections. This Court by an interim order dated 21.08.2009 directed that the elections may be held on the scheduled date but result will not be declared. The elections were held as per schedule on 23.08.2009. Thereafter the appellant who was the petitioner in Writ Petition No.44223 of 2009 got the writ petition dismissed as infructuous on 7.10.2009. After dismissal of the Writ Petition, the District Inspector of Schools passed the order dated 12.10.2009 attesting the signatures of the appellant as Manager of the Committee of Management only on the ground that the writ petition had been dismissed. 5. After dismissal of the Writ Petition, the District Inspector of Schools passed the order dated 12.10.2009 attesting the signatures of the appellant as Manager of the Committee of Management only on the ground that the writ petition had been dismissed. 5. The said order of the District Inspector of Schools attesting the signatures was assailed by the respondent no.1 in this appeal by way of Writ Petition No.54633 of 2009. The said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide judgment and order dated 8.7.2011. The reasoning for quashing the order dated 12.10.2009 as incorporated by the learned Single Judge is that once the Writ petition No.44223 of 2009 had been got dismissed as infrucutuous, no benefit arising out of any order in the said Writ Petition could subsequently accrue to the said petitioner.ýÿ According to the learned Single Judge the Writ Court did not decide the lis as to whether the order dated 20.8.2009 passed by the District Inspector of Schools staying the election schedule was valid or not, no sanctity could be given to the elections which were got conducted under the interim orders of this Court. No Court or authority decided as to whether the elections could or could not be held on 23.8.2009 and secondly if held whether they had been validly held or not. 6. In view of the above discussion we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned Single Judge warranting interference. 7. Appeal being devoid of merit is accordingly dismissed. _____________