JUDGMENT Hon’ble V.K. Shukla, J.—Satyawan Rao, describing himself as Manager of the Committee of Management of Sri Anant Adarsh Inter College Ganiyar Deoria has approached this Court questioning validity of the decision dated 17.10.2011 taken by Regional Joint Director of Education 7th Region Gorakhpur wherein he has proceeded to disapprove election set up by Satyawan Rao and has proceeded to accept the election of the Managing Committee of the institution wherein Smt. Amarawati Singh has been accepted as Manager. 2. Brief background of the case as mentioned in the writ petition is that Shri Anant Adarsh Inter College, Ganiyari, Deoria is recognized and aided institution and salary of the teachers and employees is being given under the U.P. Madhyamik Education Act, 1921 read with the provisions of U.P. Act No. 24 of 1971. The institution is run and managed by the registered society knows Anant Adarsh Shiksha Parishad. The members of the said society elect from amongst themselves the Committee of Management to manage the affairs of the institution. Petitioner further claims that in the year 1982, there were two rival committee and Rajesh Rao was the manager of one Committee of Management and Vindhachal Rao was other rival Committee. Further the then Deputy Director of Education by his order dated 12.4.1982 passed under Section 16-A (7) of the U.P. Intermediate Education, Act, de-recognizing both the Committee and directed the District Inspector of Schools, Deoria to enquire about the members of General Body and conduct election of Committee of Management within one month. The District Inspector of Schools vide its order dated 20.6.1983 declared 32 members as valid members of the society and election was held on 4.9.1983 of the Committee of Management according to Scheme of Administration wherein Rajesh Rao was elected as manager. Aggrieved by the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 20.6.1983, in all four the members filed suit No. 1865 of 1983 in Civil Court against the order dated 20.6.1983 and against the election of the Committee of Management dated 4.9.1983 and also prayed to pass injunction order to stop the Committee of Management not to function. Said suit was decreed ex-parte on 22.9.1984. After decree was passed on 22.9.1984, Rajesh Rao filed recall application which was registered as recall application No. 126 of 1984 and the said recall application was dismissed by the order dated 15.2.1986. Said suit was decreed ex-parte on 22.9.1984. After decree was passed on 22.9.1984, Rajesh Rao filed recall application which was registered as recall application No. 126 of 1984 and the said recall application was dismissed by the order dated 15.2.1986. Thereafter another recall application has been moved by Rajesh Rao and same was registered as Recall Application No. 150 of 1986 and therein interim order was passed on 18.7.1987 and thereafter on 16.7.1991 said application in question was got dismissed as not pressed. Petitioner’s claim that during his continuance as Manager, Rajesh Rao inducted 49 members and further submit that once said suit in question has been dismissed then said members cannot at all be treated to be valid members. Petitioner has contended that 31.1.2010 was the date fixed for election of the Committee of Management and petitioner in his turn has filed objection on 20.1.2010 requesting therein that election of the Committee of Management be held from amongst valid members of the General Body. Petitioners submit that District Inspector of Schools passed order on 20.2.2010 and directed to hold election from amongst members enrolled before 1983. Thereafter said order in question was cancelled on 26.2.2010, and District Inspector of Schools after being informed passed another order on 15.4.2010. Petitioner submits that respondents had come with case that the election of the Committee of Management has already been held on 31.1.2010 and thereafter after papers have been received in respect of election the District Inspector of Schools informed Regional Joint Director of Education. District Inspector of Schools thereafter has passed on 4.4.2011 thereafter contesting respondents approached Regional Joint Director of Education and Regional Joint Director of Education has proceeded to pass 15.4.2011. Against the same, petitioners filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 24615 of 2011 and this Court on 27.4.2011 remanded the matter back to the Regional Joint Director of Education to decide the same. Thereafter Regional Joint Director of Education has decided the matter on 14.7.2011, against which petitioners have rushed to this Court. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 6 and therein it has been mentioned that petitioners have concealed fact regarding filing of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31137 of 2011 and the interim order dated 26.5.2011 and also factum that Special Appeal No. 1056 of 2011 was filed and same was dismissed by this Court on 18.7.2011. 3. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 6 and therein it has been mentioned that petitioners have concealed fact regarding filing of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31137 of 2011 and the interim order dated 26.5.2011 and also factum that Special Appeal No. 1056 of 2011 was filed and same was dismissed by this Court on 18.7.2011. It has been stated that election of the Committee of Management of the institution has be held on 23.10.1988 wherein Rajesh Rao was elected as Manager and said election was recognized by the District Inspector of Schools and in the year 1989 Rajesh Rao resigned as Manager and Ganga Prasad Singh, father in law of respondent No. 6, Amrawati Singh was elected as Manager and signature was also attested by the District Inspector of Schools on 11.6.1990. Said action was subject-matter of challenge in writ petition filed before this Court and said writ petition was dismissed on 23.11.1988 on the ground of alternative remedy of filing suit. Fresh elections have been held on 17.11.1991 wherein Ganga Prasad Singh was elected as Manager and his signatures were also attested on 18.11.1991. At said juncture Satyawan Rao filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition 37672 of 1991 and therein no interim order was passed and same was dismissed on 25.9.2001. Again fresh elections have been held on 15.12.1994 and therein Ganga Prasad Singh once again was elected as Manager and his signature has been attested by the District Inspector of Schools on 10.7.1995. Again fresh elections were held on 21.12.1997 wherein again Ganga Prasad Singh was elected as Manager. Fresh elections were again held on 21.12.2000 wherein Amarawati Singh was elected as Manager and the said election has been recognized by the Regional Level Committee on 1.1.2001. Fresh election of the Committee of Management were again held on 28.12.2003 and the said elections were also approved by the Regional Level Committee vide order dated 28.12.2004. Fresh elections have been again claimed to have been held on 14.1.2007 and same has been recognized by the Regional Level Committee on 31.5.2007. Fresh election of the Managing Committee again claimed to have been held on 31.1.2010 and therein Accounts Officer has acted as Observer and therein Amarawati Singh was again elected as Manager and report was sent by the Observer to the District Inspector of Schools on 1.2.2010. Fresh election of the Managing Committee again claimed to have been held on 31.1.2010 and therein Accounts Officer has acted as Observer and therein Amarawati Singh was again elected as Manager and report was sent by the Observer to the District Inspector of Schools on 1.2.2010. Said elections have been approved on 26.2.2010 and thereafter District Inspector of Schools on 15.4.2010 cancelled earlier order dated 26.2.2010 and thereafter it has been stated that elections have been shown by Satyawan Rao on 28.2.2010 and said election are not in consonance with the Scheme of Administration. District Inspector of Schools asked Regional Joint Director of Education to give advice and Regional Joint Director of Education on 29.10.2010 asked District Inspector of Schools to refer the matter. District Inspector of Schools inspite of the same approved the election of petitioners on 28.3.2011, in this background it has been stated that rightful decision has been taken by the Regional Joint Director of Education on the basis of material available, as such on interference should be made. 4. To the counter-affidavit so filed, rejoinder-affidavit has been filed and therein averments mentioned in the counter-affidavit has been disputed and that of writ petition has been reiterated, by mentioning that election of respondents is nothing but manipulated election based on manipulated electoral college. 5. After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of the parties. 6. Sri Anil Tiwari, Advocate as well as Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, Advocate appearing for Satyawan Rao contended with vehemence that in the present case once decree passed in suit had been operating with full force then by no stretch of imagination Smt. Amarawati could have claimed that she has been validly elected as Manager and the Regional Joint Director of Education has clearly erred in law in deciding the issues in its correct perspective, as such writ petition in question deserves to be allowed. 7. 7. Countering the said submission, learned Standing counsel as well as Sri Rahul Jain, Advocate contended that in the present case suit in question has been filed by four members for accepting them as members and subsequent to the same, said incumbents have been enrolled as member and various elections have been held from time to time and had been accorded recognition, and challenge made has been repelled in view of this challenge made is unsustainable and writ petition in question deserves to be dismissed. 8. After respective arguments have been advanced factual situation which has so emerged in the present case that there is registered society known as Anant Adarsh Shiksha Parishad and members of the General Body of the aforesaid society from amongst themselves elect Committee of Management to run and manage the affairs of the institution. In the year 1982, there were two rival claimants, one group headed by Rajesh Rao and other group headed by Vindhyachal Rao. Deputy Director of Education on 12.4.1982 de-recognized both the committees and asked the District Inspector of Schools to make inquiry about the members of the general body and conduct elections of the Committee of Management accordingly. The District Inspector of Schools on 20.6.1983 declared 32 members as valid members of the society and has proceeded to hold the election on 4.9.1983. The District Inspector of Schools, after said elections have been held accorded recognition to the same and thereafter suit No. 1865 of 1983 was filed against the said order dated 20.6.1983 by Gulab Singh, Baleshwar Singh, Ram Pal Singh and Ram Dev Singh for accepting them as members, and for declaring elections held to be invalid. Said suit in question had been decreed ex-parte and thereafter it is also reflected that after said decree has been passed, recall application has been moved which was initially dismissed and thereafter another recall application was moved wherein pending disposal interim order was passed. Thereafter said application in question has been got dismissed as not pressed on 16.7.1991. It is also further reflected from the record that incumbent in whose favour decree has been passed, their membership has been accepted and thereafter various elections have been held from time to time and said elections have been subject-matter of challenge but the same challenge has not been entertained by this Court and said writ petition has been dismissed on 23.11.1988. Not only this election was again held on 17.11.1991 and against the same Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37672 of 1991 has been filed and same has been dismissed on 25.9.2001. Again fresh elections have been held on 15.12.1994 and signature has been attested by the District Inspector of Schools on 10.7.1995. Again fresh elections were held on 21.12.1997 and signature have been attested on 22.12.1997 thereafter again fresh elections were again held on 21.12.2000 and the said election has been recognized by the Regional Level Committee on 1.1.2001. Thereafter fresh election of the Committee of Management were again held on 28.12.2003 and same was accorded recognition by the Regional Level Committee vide order dated 28.12.2004. Thereafter again fresh elections were held on 14.1.2007 and same has been recognized by the Regional Level Committee on 31.5.2007. Thereafter again fresh election of the Managing Committee have been held on 31.1.2010 and the said election is again subject-matter of challenge and said election has been accepted to be valid election by Regional Joint Director of Education. 9. Entire emphasis from the side of petitioners is that once decree in question has been passed then net effect of the same was that any subsequent exercise undertaken, subsequent to the same, is of no consequence and same has to be ignored. In the present case accepted position is that District Inspector of Schools had finalized electoral college of 32 members and four incumbents who were aggrieved against the same, namely Gulab Singh, Baleshwar Singh, Ram Pal Singh and Ram Dev Singh prayed in the plaint that decision which has been taken on 20.6.1983 to exclude these four persons from the list of members, same is illegal and void and same is of no consequence. Consequently, in the fact of the case, election based on the same held on 4.9.1983 be also held to be bad. The date of filing of plaint is 15.11.1983 and the record in question reflects that on 22.9.1984 said suit was decreed ex-parte under Order VIII Rule 10 C.P.C and thereafter record in question reflects that application for recall of the order has been moved and said recall application in question was dismissed and thereafter again recall application has been moved wherein interim order has been passed and subsequent to the same said application was got dismissed as not pressed on 16.7.1991. 10. 10. Question is that what would be the effect of decree passed in the aforesaid suit 11. Accepted position in the present case is that four incumbents namely Gulab Singh, Baleshwar Singh, Ram Pal Singh and Ram Dev Singh were not accepted as members and in absence of these four persons elections have been held and prayer made in the plaint, clearly reflected that these four incumbents prayed for declaration of their membership and preventing them as member be declared as null and void and further election based on the same be also declared null and void. 12. This much is also accepted position that the suit in question has been decided ex parte and thereafter recall application has been moved therein interim order has been passed and said recall application had been subsequently got dismissed as not pressed on 16.7.1991. During the said period Rajesh Rao continued to function as Manager. As far as period of election is concerned tenure of the said election had already run out and coupled with this incumbents whose membership has been done away with they were accepted as member and these four incumbents have never made any complaint whatsoever. In view of this fact, once grievance of the said four incumbents was for acceptance of their membership and membership of 32 incumbents who have been accepted as member has never been disputed by them and tenure of the said election had already run out then Committee of Management of the institution which was in de facto control of the institution, had at regular repeated intervals held the election and each and every elections held have been recognized by the District Inspector of Schools and Regional Level Committee, respectively. Writ petition filed by the Satyawan Rao questioning the validity of the elections held in the year 1988 had been dismissed relegating him to the remedy of suit, and till today he has not filed any suit and similar challenge was made by him qua the election held in the year 1991 on 17.11.1991 by filing Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 37672 of 1991, and said writ petition has also been dismissed. Writ Petition No. 37672 of 1991, and said writ petition has also been dismissed. Once such is the factual situation that after dismissal of the suit, membership of aforesaid four incumbents has been accepted and qua thirty two members there has been no dispute and at the repeated intervals the outgoing Managing Committee of the institution has held the elections and same had been accorded recognition by the Educational Authorities and on challenge being made, no relief has been accorded qua the election held in the year 1988 and 1991 then the request as has been made by Satayawan Rao in the fact of the case same cannot be accepted as it is nothing but collateral challenge, without complying with the order when he has been relegated to remedy of suit. Regional Joint Director of Education in the present case has objectively considered each and every aspect of the matter and has also taken into consideration that in the past challenge made of the elections held by outgoing Managing Committee has not at all found favour with this Court, in this background once Regional Joint Director of Education has found that the elections has been held from amongst valid members in presence of observers, then no relief or reprieve can be accorded to the petitioners and the remedy of the petitioners lies in filing suit, if any for declaration of rights, if any. 13. With the above direction present writ petition is dismissed. ——————