Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 952 (ALL)

Taptej Singh Saini v. State of U. P. and Others

2012-04-20

ARUN TANDON

body2012
Arun Tandon, J.— Petitioner before this Court seeks quashing of the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 12.03.2012 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition). Facts in short giving rise to the present petition are as follows : Khalsa Vidyak Sabha, Harjinder Nagar, Kanpur Nagar which is a private Society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act. It has established an aided and recognized Intermediate College in the name and style of Harjinder Nagar Inter College, Harjinder Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. The said institution is run and managed in accordance with an approved scheme of administration as contemplated by Section 16-A of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (herein after referred to as the Act, 1921). Elections of the Committee of Management of the institution were directed to be held under the judgment and order of the Single Judge dated 12.10.2007 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22431 of 2006. Elections took place on 30.05.2011 wherein Balram Singh Oberoi was elected as President and Kulwantjeet Singh Gill was elected as Manager. The District Inspector of Schools granted recognition to the alleged elections on 06.06.2011 by attesting the signatures of Kulwantjeet Singh Gill as the Manager. A complaint was made before the District Inspector of Schools that Kulwantjeet Singh Gill was involved in criminal cases and is a history sheeter, therefore, he is not entitled to function as the manager or to be the member of the General Body as per the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. Complaint made by the petitioner in that regard went un-heard, therefore, he filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 42343 of 2011. The writ petition was dismissed after recording that the challenge in the writ petition is to the eligibility of respondent no. 4 to hold the office of the Manager and to be a member of the General Body of the Committee of Management, under the provisions of the scheme of administration the matter at the first instance is to be referred to the President of the Committee of Management and against the order of the President, an appeal before the District Inspector of Schools is provided. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to get the issue of disqualification examined by the President of the Committee of Management at the first instance. The petitioner is stated to have filed a complaint before the President. Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to get the issue of disqualification examined by the President of the Committee of Management at the first instance. The petitioner is stated to have filed a complaint before the President. Such complaint was decided under the order dated 14.01.2012. The President of the Committee of Management disposed of the representation of the petitioner by directing that a meeting of the Committee of Management be convened and the illegalities committed by the Manager during his tenure be got examined and thereafter appropriate action may be taken. Further that having regard to the criminal cases which were pending against Kulwantjeet Singh Gill, he may not be removed from the office of the Manager but he be suspended. It was ordered accordingly. Not being satisfied, Kulwantjeet Singh Gill filed an appeal in accordance with the provisions of scheme of administration before the District Inspector of Schools. The District Inspector of Schools has allowed the appeal filed by Kulwantjeet Singh Gill and has set aside the order of the President vide order dated 12.03.2012. It is against this order dated12.03.2012 that the present writ petition has been filed. This Court while considering the petition on 18.04.2012 framed following two issues : a) Whether a scheme framed under Section 16-A of the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 can be said to be statutory in nature so as to give a right to a person to enforce its provisions through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. b) Whether a District Inspector of Schools while acting as the Appellate Authority under the scheme of administration can be said to have acted as an statutory authority or only as an arbitrator, appointed under the scheme of administration with the consent of the parties who are bound by the scheme of administration?. On behalf of the petitioner it is contended that a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Janta Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Thekma, Bijauli Post Thekma through its Manager vs. Deputy Director of Education, VII Region, Gorakhpur reported in 1984 UPLBEC, 1150 has held that the order passed by the Deputy Director of Education in purported exercise of powers under the scheme of administration is not just an administrative order. Therefore, it is contended that the writ petition against the order of the District Inspector of Schools in the facts cannot be treated to a simple administrative order and a writ petition against the same would be maintainable. He has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Single Judge in the case of Udai Pratap College, Varanasi vs. Kaulesh Prasad Singh and another reported in A.L.R. 1979 (5), 120 wherein it has been held that provisions of scheme of administration framed under the Act,1921 are statutory. Reference has also been made to the judgment of this Court in the case of Om Prakash vs. U.P. Secondary Education Service Commission, Allenganj, Allahabad and others reported in (1990) 2 UPLBEC, 983 specifically paragraph 16 wherein it has been held that although the Committee of Management may not be an statutory body but it is governed by the provisions of the scheme of administration and other statutory provisions and that the High Court had proceeded to interfere in the matter. This Court may record that the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is in direct opposition to what has been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Aley Ahmad Abidi vs. District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad reported in 1976 AWC, 731 wherein in paragraph 27 and 29 it has been held as follows : 27. The Scheme framed by a recognised Intermediate College cannot, in our opinion, be regarded as a piece of subordinate legislation like the Rules, Regulations-Statutes and Ordinances, which an Act empowers the Government or the statutory bodies under the Act to make frame. A recognized Intermediate College which is required by Section 16-A to have a Scheme of Administration, cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be regarded as statutory body. Once we hold that a Scheme of Administration required to be frame by each recognized Intermediate College under Section 16-A of the Act, is not a piece of a subordinate Legislation, it follows that the Committee of Management constituted under such a scheme, is not a body constituted under a statute, but is merely governed by the provisions of the Act and Regulations framed thereunder. 29. Thus, we are unable to accept the contention of Sri Gupta that the Committee of Management of a recognised Intermediate College is a statutory body? 29. Thus, we are unable to accept the contention of Sri Gupta that the Committee of Management of a recognised Intermediate College is a statutory body? Reference may also be had to the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Krishna Dutta Bajpai vs. District Inspector of Schools reported in 1985 UPLBEC, 551 wherein it has been held that no writ petition would be maintainable merely for enforcing the scheme of administration, though the petitioner may seek his remedy by way of Civil Suit as against the Committee. Similarly another Single Judge of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Adarsh Shiv Kanya High School, Syana and another vs. Deputy Director of Education and others reported in (1996) 4 UPLBEC, 2656 in paragraph 16, after referring to the judgment in the case of Krishna Dutta Bajpai and in the case of Aley Ahmad Abidi vs. District Inspector of Schools (Supra) has held that a writ petition would not, therefore, lie merely for enforcing the scheme of administration, though the aggrieved person may seek his remedy through a Civil Suit. From the facts as have been stated above, it would be seen that the petitioner virtually wants disqualification of Kulwantjeet Singh Gill with reference to the provision of scheme of administration. Such an scheme of administration has been held by this Court to be non-statutory. It has been explained that such framing of scheme of administration cannot be termed to be a subordinate piece of legislation. The appellate power conferred under the scheme of administration upon the District Inspector of Schools in the facts of the case is only a private arrangement by persons subscribing to the scheme of administration. The power conferred upon the District Inspector of Schools is not an statutory power inasmuch as the scheme of administration is not statutory. It is more or less in the nature of an arbitration agreed upon by the members subscribing to the scheme of administration. The order passed by the District Inspector of Schools is not an order passed in exercise of any statutory power. Such an order of the District Inspector of Schools, passed on the basis of a purely private arrangement, cannot be subjected to challenge by means of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The remedy available to the petitioner is to file a Civil Suit. Such an order of the District Inspector of Schools, passed on the basis of a purely private arrangement, cannot be subjected to challenge by means of writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The remedy available to the petitioner is to file a Civil Suit. For the said reasons the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to file a Civil Suit. _