JUDGMENT R.M. Borde, J. 1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2. Petitioners, who are the members of Sikh community, are challenging order dated 21.05.2012, issued by Respondent No.2 i.e. District Collector and Administrator, The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board, (Gurudwara Board), Nanded thereby reappointing Respondent No.4 as Superintendent of The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board, Nanded with effect from 22.05.2012. Petitioners also question pay fixation of Respondent No.4 at Rs.78,024/- per month instead of pay band of Rs.9300-34000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.5400/-, as prescribed by the Gurudwara Board. The petitioners also requested for issuance of direction for recovery of excess amount paid to Respondent No.4. The petitioner no.1 was a Member and Secretary of Gurudwara Board from 1969 up to 1990 and he is at present Secretary to the Sachkhand Hazuri Khalsa, Diwan, Nanded) since 1984. Petitioner no.2 is a Member of the Bidar Gurudwara Nanakjira, Bidar. 3. On 10.07.2000, the State Government, by issuing a Notification, superseded the regularly constituted Board and appointed Government Administrative Committee consisting of various persons headed by the Collector, Shri U.P.S. Madan, IAS, Sardar Buta Singh and Dr.Shri P.S.Pasricha, the then Director General of Police, Maharashtra State. The Board is now headed by District Collector, Nanded. On 13.12.2005, the Administrative Committee, vide Resolution, delegated powers for filling up the vacancy in the office of Superintendent, Gurudwara Board, for the period of three years, including appointment of one year on probation, to the then Chairman/President Dr.Shri P.S.Pasricha. Since the post could not be filled in, one more Resolution came to be adopted by the Administrative Committee authorizing the President Dr.Shri P.S.Pasricha to make appointment to the post of Superintendent, since the appointment already made was objected to on the ground that the incumbent was overage. The President, in exercise of powers conferred upon him by the Administrative Committee, initially appointed Respondent No.4 on deputation by an order dated 24.04.2006. Respondent No.4 was, at the relevant time, employee of Punjab and Sindh Bank, Jaipur and was posted at Jaipur. The employer i.e. Punjab and Sindh Bank, consented for lending services of its employee i.e. Respondent No.4 to Gurudwara Board. Respondent No.4 was, at the relevant time, employee of Punjab and Sindh Bank, Jaipur and was posted at Jaipur. The employer i.e. Punjab and Sindh Bank, consented for lending services of its employee i.e. Respondent No.4 to Gurudwara Board. The initial period of deputation of Respondent No.4 was extended up to 22.05.2009, which was further extended for a period of three years with effect from May 23, 2009 by an order dated 21.05.2009. 4. On completion of extended period of deputation of three years, the Collector, Nanded, by an order dated 21.05.2012, reappointed Respondent No.4 as Superintendent of Gurudwara Board with effect from 22.05.2012 till further orders or until completion of 60 years of age. The District Collector has issued the order in his capacity as Administrator of the Gurudwara Board. It is to be noted that the order issued by the Collector on 21.05.2012 is in respect of reappointment of Respondent No.4 and not continuation of deputation. 5. It appears, Respondent No.4 had made request to his employer i.e. Punjab and Sindh Bank to permit him to opt for voluntary retirement on 21.05.2012, which request was accepted on the same day i.e. 21.05.2012 and he was permitted to retire voluntarily. Respondent No.4 has been relieved from Bank’s services on 21.05.2012 itself. A day earlier i.e. on 20.05.2012, Respondent No.4 has been relieved from the charge of Superintendent of The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board, (Gurudwara Board), Nanded, with instructions to report for duty at the Head Office of Punjab and Sindh Bank on 21.05.2012. Respondent No.4 has been relieved from the post of Superintendent for a day with a view to enable him to join promotional post of DGM. It has further been pointed out that Respondent No.4 was permitted to join the promotional post by the Punjab and Sindh Bank on 21.05.2012 for one day. He tendered an application for voluntary retirement, which was accepted by the Bank and he was relieved on the same day i.e. 21.05.2012. The salary of Respondent No.4 in the promotional post was fixed at Rs. 46,800 + Rs.30,045.00+ CCA Rs.540+ HRA Rs.3918/- and FBA Rs. 1179/-. He was permitted to draw salary for one day on the promotional post amounting to Rs.2665.63. 6. Respondent No.4, in pursuance to the order issued by the Collector on 21.05.2012, joined duties as Superintendent with effect from 22.05.2012. 46,800 + Rs.30,045.00+ CCA Rs.540+ HRA Rs.3918/- and FBA Rs. 1179/-. He was permitted to draw salary for one day on the promotional post amounting to Rs.2665.63. 6. Respondent No.4, in pursuance to the order issued by the Collector on 21.05.2012, joined duties as Superintendent with effect from 22.05.2012. It, thus, appears that the whole exercise was undertaken to enable Respondent No.4 to join the promotional post with Punjab and Sindh Bank and also to facilitate him to opt for voluntary retirement. The process of joining the promotional post, tendering application for voluntary retirement, acceptance of request by his employer i.e. Punjab and Sindh Bank as well as permitting him i.e. Respondent No.4 to relieve from Bank’s services was completed with electrifying speed within one day. There is no surprise that the salary of Respondent No.4 has been fixed in accordance with wages drawn by him on the promotional post of DGM of Punjab and Sindh Bank for one day. An order to that effect prescribing salary of Respondent No.4 at Rs.78,024/- per month has been issued by the Collector on 06.06.2012. The Punjab and Sindh Bank has also issued no objection in favour of Respondent No.4 on June 19, 2012, allowing him to join as Superintendent of The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board (Gurudwara Board), Nanded, post retirement. The petitioners have also drawn our attention to the Resolution adopted by the Administrator of Gurudwara Board, namely Dr.Shri P.S.Pasricha prescribing salary of Respondent No.4 in the pay scale of DGM of Punjab and Sindh Bank with retrospective effect from 01.01.2010. 7. It is the contention of petitioners that the then Administrator Dr.Shri P.S.Pasricha has extended financial benefits to Respondent No.4 illegally since he was closely related to Respondent No.4. It is also contended that since the Administrator was closely related with Respondent No.4, he has been initially appointed on deputation and by adopting a very novel method, he has been reappointed in the year 2012. 8. The Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act, 1956 (for short, “Gurudwara Act of 1956”) has been enacted for proper administration of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib. Chapter III of the Act prescribe functions of the Board, the Committee and the Superintendent. 8. The Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Act, 1956 (for short, “Gurudwara Act of 1956”) has been enacted for proper administration of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib. Chapter III of the Act prescribe functions of the Board, the Committee and the Superintendent. Section 36 (2) (vii) provides that it would be function of the Board to appoint and remove office holders of the Gurudwara in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 9. There are Rules framed in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 61 of the Act. Rule 16 of the Rules provides that the Board shall, subject to approval of the State Government, prescribe, within such period as the State Government may fix, the qualifications necessary for the post of Superintendent and shall similarly prescribe such qualification for other office holders. In the absence of prescription of qualifications by the Board, the powers are vested with the State Government under Rule 17 of the Rules to fix such qualifications. There are also bye laws framed in exercise of powers conferred under Section 62 of the Gurudwara Act of 1956. The relevant bye laws prescribing appointment of Superintendent are bye laws no.17 to 21, which read thus: 17. Appointment of Superintendent under (v) of sub-section (2) of Section 62 – Subject to the provisions of section 35 and the qualification prescribed under rules 16 and 17 of the Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Rules, 1958, Superintendent shall be appointed by the Board, from amongst:- (a) suitable Government employees, whose services Government agree to place at the disposal of the Board for appointment as Superintendent. (b) From amongst suitable employees of other bodies or institutions whose employers may agree to give their services on loan to the Board for appointment as Superintendent; (c) from amongst employees of the Board who are considered eligible for promotion to the post of the Superintendent. (d) By recruitment from amongst outsiders. 18. Government servant on deputation as Superintendent – When the service of a Government Servants are obtained on loan for appointment as Superintendent, the terms and conditions of his service shall be such as will have been prescribed by Government and agreed to by the Board. 19. (d) By recruitment from amongst outsiders. 18. Government servant on deputation as Superintendent – When the service of a Government Servants are obtained on loan for appointment as Superintendent, the terms and conditions of his service shall be such as will have been prescribed by Government and agreed to by the Board. 19. Employee of other Institution on deputation as Superintendent – When the services of an employee of any other body or institution are obtained on loan by the Board, the terms and conditions of his employment shall be such as will have been agreed to by the Board and the body or the Institution concerned. 20. Promotion of the Board’s employee – The Board may promote any of its employee to the Superintendent’s post, provided it finds him to have the necessary qualifications and to be suitable for appointment as its Superintendent. 21. Appointment of Superintendent – A person selected for appointment as Superintendent by the Board from amongst outsiders should not be less than 35 years and not more than 55 years of age on the date of his recruitment. (2) The Superintendent shall be entitled to draw such pay in such scale of pay as the Board may from time to time determine, provided that the Board shall not reduce the scale and the pay sanctioned to any person at the time of his appointment so long as he continues to be in the service of the Board. (3) In addition, the Superintendent shall be entitled to dearness and other allowances at such rates and in such manner as the Board may sanction to its employees from time to time and shall also be entitled to:- (a) free use of a conveyance of the Gurudwara for his journeys within the limits of the Nanded Municipal area, and (b) free furnished residential accommodation within the premises of the Gurudwara and also free supply of water and light in his residence. (4) The selected person shall, before joining his appointment as Superintendent, be required to produce a Certificate of Physical fitness from the Civil Surgeon of Nanded and to execute an agreement in Form II. (4) The selected person shall, before joining his appointment as Superintendent, be required to produce a Certificate of Physical fitness from the Civil Surgeon of Nanded and to execute an agreement in Form II. (5) The appointment of an outsider to the post of the Superintendent shall in the first instance be on probation for a period of six months and shall, on expiry of the probationary period be liable to be terminated without assigning any reasons and without payment of any compensation if the Board finds that the services of the Superintendent during the period of probation were not to its entire satisfaction : Provided that, if in the case of any person the Board finds it necessary the period of probation may be extended suitably by the Board: Provided further that, no such extension of the probation shall be sanctioned on more than two occasions and that the total period of probation allowed in the case of any individual shall not exceed two and a half years. (6) If in the case of a person appointed as Superintendent, on probation, the Board for any reason considers the appointment to be undesirable, it shall by a notice issued at least one month before the expiry of the period of probation, inform him that his services shall be terminated immediately on the expiry of the period of probation and shall arrange for his relief immediately on the expiry of the period of probation. (7) If the Board desires to continue the appointment of any person appointed as Superintendent on probation, it shall at least one month before the expiry of the period of probation pass a resolution confirming the person in his appointment as Superintendent on the completion of the period of probation. (7) If the Board desires to continue the appointment of any person appointed as Superintendent on probation, it shall at least one month before the expiry of the period of probation pass a resolution confirming the person in his appointment as Superintendent on the completion of the period of probation. (8) On confirmation, the Superintendent shall be entitled to continue in office for the duration of the full term of his appointment, and shall be eligible for reappointment at the expiry of the term : Provided that, he shall not be continued or employed after he has attained age of 60 years except under a special resolution, recording the reasons therefor, passed at the meeting of the Board by a majority of 3/5th of the total number of the members of the Board; Provided further that, the Board may permit him to resign his post as Superintendent before the expiry of his term, if 6 calender months written notice of his intended resignation is given in advance by him to the Board. (9) A confirmed Superintendent shall be, - (a) A full time servant of the Board : (b) be entitled to leave and travelling allowance according to the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959, subject to the condition that the powers exercisable by the Chairman and those exercisable by Government, shall be exercisable by the Board: Provided that, for journeys by railway, he shall be entitled to travel by First Class; (c) in the matter of his conduct and discipline, while in the service of the Board, be subject to the Bombay Civil Services Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act or rules framed thereunder : Provided that, the powers exercisable by Government under these Rules shall be exercised by the Board, and provided further that, pending any enquiry into his alleged misconduct, the President shall have the power to suspend him in anticipation of approval of this action by the Board at its next general meeting : (d) during the period of his service, excluding the period spent on leave without pay, be required to contribute to a provident fund approved by Government in this behalf at the rate of 6 paise per rupee of his basic pay; and (e) in the event of his retirement or on his leaving the service of the Board or on his services being terminated otherwise than on account of any misconduct, be entitled to a gratuity equal to one month’s basic pay for each completed year of service of respective years upto the age of 60 years, the amount of his accumulated subscription to the Provident Fund, and in addition payment by the Board of an amount equal to the amount of his accumulated subscription to the Provident Fund to which he would be subscribing where the service rendered by him is not less than 3 years. 10. As provided under bye-law 17(a) the Superintendent can be appointed from amongst suitable Government employees whose services Government agree to place at the disposal of the Board for appointment as Superintendent; or (b) from amongst suitable employees of other bodies or institutions whose employers may agree to give their services on loan to the Board for appointment as Superintendent. 10. As provided under bye-law 17(a) the Superintendent can be appointed from amongst suitable Government employees whose services Government agree to place at the disposal of the Board for appointment as Superintendent; or (b) from amongst suitable employees of other bodies or institutions whose employers may agree to give their services on loan to the Board for appointment as Superintendent. It can be said that the initial appointment of Respondent No.4 on 24.04.2006 as well as continuation of his deputation from time to time till the year 2012 i.e. up to 20.05.2012 is in exercise of powers conferred by bye-law 17(b). Respondent No.4 is from amongst the employees of other bodies or institutions i.e. Punjab and Sindh Bank and his employer had agreed to give his services on loan to the Board for appointment as Superintendent. Thus, it is clear that the appointment of Respondent No.4 as Superintendent on deputation for the period between 24.04.2006 till 20.05.2012 is as a deputationist and made in exercise of powers under bye-law no. 17(b). Bye-law no.17(d) prescribe mode of appointment of Superintendent by recruitment from amongst outsiders. The appointment of Respondent No.4 since 22.05.2012, shall have to be construed as recruitment from amongst outsiders within meaning of bye-law no.17(d). Such an inference is required to be drawn for the reason that Respondent No.4 was relieved from the responsibilities of Superintendent by the Collector on 20.05.2012 in the afternoon, by adopting a Resolution on 19.05.2012. Respondent No.4 had handed over the charge to one Shri S. Sant Singh, Senior Assistant Superintendent on 20.05.2012 in pursuance to the order passed by the Collector and Administrator of Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib, Gurudwara, Nanded. On 21.05.2012, he reported for duties on the promotional post of DGM with Punjab and Sindh Bank. He tendered an application for voluntary retirement on the same day and it was accepted and he was relieved on the same day i.e. 21.05.2012. He rejoined the post of Superintendent on 22.05.2012. The inevitable inference, which is required to be drawn, is that Respondent No.4, since 22.05.2012, is not holding charge of the post of Superintendent as a deputationist, as such his appointment as Superintendent from 22.05.2012 shall have to be construed within contemplation of bye-law no.17(d). 11. He rejoined the post of Superintendent on 22.05.2012. The inevitable inference, which is required to be drawn, is that Respondent No.4, since 22.05.2012, is not holding charge of the post of Superintendent as a deputationist, as such his appointment as Superintendent from 22.05.2012 shall have to be construed within contemplation of bye-law no.17(d). 11. Rule 21 of the Rules provides that a person selected for appointment as Superintendent by the Board from amongst the outsiders should not be less than 35 years and not more than 55 years of age on the date of his recruitment. Sub-rule (2) provides that the Superintendent shall be entitled to draw such pay, in such pay scale, as the Board may, from time to time, determine. It is not a matter of dispute that the date of birth of Respondent No.4 is 24.07.1954 and as such, Respondent No.4 was more than 57 years and 10 months of age on 22.05.2012. It is, thus, clear that Respondent No.4 does not fulfill the criteria of upper age limit prescribed under bye-law no.21. The Administrator of the Board and Collector, Nanded i.e. Respondent No.2 ought not to have issued an order of appointment, appointing Respondent No.4 as Superintendent since he does not fulfill the eligibility criteria prescribed under bye law no.21. 12. It is also to be noted that bye-law no.21(5) provides that the appointment of outsider to the post of Superintendent shall, in the first instance, be on probation for the period of six months and shall, on the expiry of probationary period, be liable to be terminated without assigning any reason and without payment of any compensation if the Board finds that the services of the Superintendent, during the period of probation, were not to its entire satisfaction. Bye-law no.21(7) provides procedure for continuation of Superintendent beyond the period of probation and it has been laid down that at least one month before the expiry of period of probation, the Board shall pass a Resolution confirming appointment of the person as Superintendent on completion of period of probation. Bye-law no.21(8) provides that on confirmation, the Superintendent shall be entitled to continue in the office for the duration of full term of his appointment, and shall be eligible for reappointment at the expiry of the term. Bye-law no.21(8) provides that on confirmation, the Superintendent shall be entitled to continue in the office for the duration of full term of his appointment, and shall be eligible for reappointment at the expiry of the term. It is also provided that he shall not be continued or employed after he has attained age of 60 years except under a special resolution, recording reasons therefor, passed at the meeting of the Board by a majority of 3/5th of the total number of members of the Board. In the instant matter, while making appointment of Respondent No.4, the procedure, as prescribed under bye-law no.21, has been given go bye. At the first instance, Respondent No.4 ought not to have been appointed since he has crossed 55 years of age. Secondly, if the Superintendent is to be appointed by recruitment from amongst outsiders, his initial appointment has to be on probation for a period of six months and before expiry of period of six months, if he is to be continued, the Board is required to adopt a Resolution, as contemplated by bye-law no.21(7). In the instant matter, the order of appointment issued in favour of Respondent No.4 by the Administrator and District Collector is until further orders or until his completion of 60 years of age, which is clearly in violation of bye-law no.21. 13. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.4 contends that appointment of Respondent No.4 cannot be construed as ‘appointment’ within contemplation of bye-law no. 17(d) and as such, prescription of age and other requirements under bye-law no.21 are unacceptable. We are unable to accept the proposition advanced on behalf of Respondent No.4 for the reason that initial appointment of Respondent No.4, since 24.04.2006, was as a deputationist whose services were given on loan to the Board by the employer, whereas, his reappointment, after he opted for voluntary retirement on 21.05.2012, is within contemplation of bye law no.17(d). As Respondent No.2 has not adhered to the requirements of bye law no.21 while making appointment of Respondent No.4, his appointment made by order dated 21.05.2012, is liable to be quashed. 14. Petitioners have also contended that salary for the post of Superintendent has been prescribed by the Board as per 6th Pay Commission Pay Scales at Rs.9300-34000 + Grade pay of Rs. 14. Petitioners have also contended that salary for the post of Superintendent has been prescribed by the Board as per 6th Pay Commission Pay Scales at Rs.9300-34000 + Grade pay of Rs. 5400/- and as such, it was impermissible for the Board to permit Respondent No.4 to draw basic salary of Rs.46,800 plus DA Rs. 30045/-, total emoluments of Rs.78,024/-. 15. We have considered the argument advanced by petitioners. However, in view of provisions contained in bye-law no. 21(2), the Board is competent to prescribe the pay scale for the post of Superintendent. In the instant matter, the Board has adopted Resolution and protected pay scale of Respondent No.4 on par with salary admissible to him as an employee of Punjab and Sindh Bank. Since the Board has adopted Resolution protecting the pay scale of Respondent No.4, it cannot be accepted that the Board has committed any illegality in prescribing pay scale admissible to Respondent No.4. The power has been exercised by the Board while prescribing salary of Respondent No.4 in consonance with bye law no.21(2) and as such, no direction, as requested by the petitioners for recovery of excess amount, paid to Respondent No.4 towards salary, need be issued. 16. Petitioners have placed reliance on the judgment in the matter of B.S.MinhasVs. Indian Statistical Institute and others, reported in AIR 1984 SC 363 ; and contended that it was obligatory on the part of the Administrator & District Collector to follow the bye laws since the bye laws have been framed for the conduct of affairs of Gurudwara and with a view to avoid arbitrariness. 17. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.4 has taken a serious objection for entertaining the petition, on the ground of availability of alternate remedy of presentation of Revision Application with the State Government. 17. Learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No.4 has taken a serious objection for entertaining the petition, on the ground of availability of alternate remedy of presentation of Revision Application with the State Government. Reliance is placed on Section 47 of the Act 1956 which provides that the Government may, at any time, for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed by or as to the regularity of the proceedings of the Board, the Committee or the Superintendent acting in the exercise of any power or authority conferred by or under this Act, call for and examine the record of any case pending before or disposed of by the Board, the Committee or the Superintendent, as the case may be, pass such order with reference thereto as it thinks fit. 18. The objection raised on behalf of Respondent No.4 would not be an impediment for exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution since remedy of Revision provided under Section 47 of the Act cannot be construed as an efficacious alternate remedy. Section 47 of the Act merely provides for the power of superintendence with the Government. In this context, reliance can be placed on the judgment delivered by Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Girdharilals/o Bhaulal Pardeshi Vs. State of Maharashtra & others, reported in 1991 MhLJ 630 as well as in the matter of Collector of Customs, Cochin Vs. A.S.Bava, reported in AIR 1968 SC 13 . 19. For the reasons recorded above, the writ petition deserves to be allowed partly and same is accordingly allowed partly. The order dated 21.05.2012, issued by Respondent No.2, appointing Respondent No.4 as Superintendent of The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board (Gurudwara Board), Nanded, with effect from 22.05.2012, is quashed and set aside. 20. Rule is accordingly made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs. 21. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 4 seeks suspension of the judgment and order passed by this Court. 22. Since this Court has held that Respondent No.4 is ineligible for being appointed as Superintendent of The Takhat Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib Board (Gurudwara Board), Nanded, the request made by Respondent No.4 does not deserve consideration.