JUDGMENT Hon’ble Rajes Kumar, J.—Heard Sri N.L. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K.P. Shukla, appearing on behalf of Caveator as well as learned Standing Counsel, appearing on behalf of the State respondents. 2. By means of the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 23.11.2011, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Muzaffar Nagar, cancelling his own order dated 14.11.2011 by which he has approved the term of the Committee of Management for five years on the basis of the amended bye-laws and further directed the Committee of Management to give names of three officers for holding the election so that the permission for holding the election, within the stipulated period, may be given. 3. The brief facts, giving rise to the present case, are that the petitioner is a Society and is running an institution in the name of Sarswati Inter College, Pipalhera, Kakrala, Khatauli, Muzaffar Nagar, recognised by the Board of High School and Intermediate, getting the grant-in-aid and is registered under the U.P. Act No. 17 of 1971. Under the scheme of administration, the term of the Committee of Management was three years. The last election of the Committee of Management was held in 2008 and was approved on 20.11.2008 by the District Inspector of Schools. By the resolution passed by the Committee of Management, an amendment has been made in the scheme of administration, amending the term of the Committee of Management from three years to five years. The said amendment has been approved by the Joint Director of Education vide order dated 15.10.2011. By the order dated 14.11.2011, the District Inspector of Schools, Muzaffar Nagar has approved the term of the Committee of Management for five years, in view of the amendment of Clause 8 of the scheme of administration, which has been approved by the Joint Director of Education. Thereafter, one Sri Prem Kumar, Son of Bhagmal Singh, life member of the Society, vide letter dated 18.11.2011, requested the District Inspector of Schools to hold the election as the term of three years has expired. On the said letter, the impugned order has been passed. 4. Thereafter, one Sri Prem Kumar, Son of Bhagmal Singh, life member of the Society, vide letter dated 18.11.2011, requested the District Inspector of Schools to hold the election as the term of three years has expired. On the said letter, the impugned order has been passed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once the amendment in the scheme of administration has been approved by which the term of the Committee of Management has been extended from three years to five years, the term of five years has rightly been approved by the District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 14.11.2011 and the cancellation of the said order is not justified. 5. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the amendment in the scheme of administration, extending the term of the Committee of Management from three years to five years, applies prospectively. Since the election of 2008 has been held in accordance to the old scheme of administration, the term of the Committee of the Management elected in the election would be of three years and amendment will not apply to the Committee of Management constituted as a result of election held in 2008, which has amended the scheme of administration extending the term of the Committee of Management from three years to five years. The reliance is placed on the decision of the learned Single Judge in the case of Committee of Management, Devraha Baba Inter College, Deoria and another v. Regional Director of Education, Gorakhpur and others, 2005(4) ESC 2692, a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Arya Kanya Inter College, Bulandshahr and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2009 (1) ESC 371 and the Circular dated 4th August, 2003, issued by the Director of Education in this regard. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, MMI Inter College, Nehtour, District Bijnore v. Deputy Director of Education and others, (1995) I UPLBEC 162. 7. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, MMI Inter College, Nehtour, District Bijnore v. Deputy Director of Education and others, (1995) I UPLBEC 162. 7. I have considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 8. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Arya Kanya Inter College, Bulandshahr and another v. State of U.P. and others (supra) has considered the provisions of U.P. Education Act, 1921, the Division Bench’s decision of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, MMI Inter College, Nehtour, District Bijnore v. Deputy Director of Education and others (supra), the judgment dated 18th September, 2003, passed in Writ Petition No. 14041 of 2003, Committee of Management of Shri Guru Nanak Manya Inter College, Bilaspur, Rampur and others v. State of U.P. and others, the decision of the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Devraha Baba Inter College, Deoria and another v. Regional Director of Education, Gorakhpur and others (supra) and the Circular dated 4th August, 2003 and has held that the Committee of Management, which has been elected in accordance with the provisions of the scheme of administration, must be permitted to continue only for the term, which was applicable at the time of election. The extension of the term so provided by seeking extension of its own term by suggesting amendment in the scheme of administration cannot be approved by this Court. The Circular dated 4th August, 2003, issued by the Director of Education, has also been approved. 9. The extension of the term so provided by seeking extension of its own term by suggesting amendment in the scheme of administration cannot be approved by this Court. The Circular dated 4th August, 2003, issued by the Director of Education, has also been approved. 9. The Circular dated 4th August, 2003, issued by the Director of Education, is reproduced below : “v’kkldh; ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa esa izca/k lfefr dk dk;Zdky rhu o"kZ ls nks o"kZ c<+k;s tkus ds laca/k esa bl dk;kZy; ds i=kad&lk0&1 ¼ÁFke½ 19954&97&98 fnukad 30-3-1998 ds }kjk funsZ'k ikfjr fd;s x;s Fks % mDr ds laca/k esa ;g Li"V fd;k tkuk gS%& 1- v’kkldh; ek/;fed fo|ky;ksa dh izca/k lfefr ds dk;Zdky esa ifjorZu@la/kks/ku gsrq lk/kkj.k lHkk dk izLrko izkIr fd;k tk;sA 2- izca/k lfefr ds dk;Zdky esa la’kks/ku gsrq lk/kkj.k lHkk dk izLrko gksus ij ijh{k.kksijkUr larq"V gksus dh n’kk esa izLrko ekU; fd;k tk ldrk gS] tks fd bl vk’k; dk izLrko ikfjr gksus ds fnukad ds mijkUr pquko esa uoxfBr izca/k lfefr ds laca/k esa izHkkodkjh gksxkA bl izLrko dk ykHk ml izca/k lfefr dk vuqeU; ugh gksxk] ftlds dk;Zdky dh vof/k esa ;g izLrko ikfjr gqvkA mDr ds vuqlkj dk;Zokgh lqfuf’pr dh tk;sA Hkonh; ¼lat; eksgu½ f’k{kk funs’kd ¼ek/;fed½ mRrj izns’k]y[kuÅA^^ 10. I am of the view that in the absence of any observation in the order of the Joint Director of Education, approving the amendment relating to its applicability, the clarification, given in the circular dated 4th August, 2003, issued by the Director of Education, is to be read in the order. 11. In the facts and circumstances, respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Division Bench of this Court, referred to hereinabove, I do not see any error in the impugned order, which requires interference by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary equitable jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. In view of the above, the writ petition fails and is dismissed. —————