JUDGMENT Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.—The order impugned dated 5.5.2018 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Rampur accords approval to no confidence motion dated 8.1.2018 passed against petitioner No. 2, who was Manager of the Committee of Management of Subhash Smarak Inter College, Khandi Khera, Tehsil Tanda, District Rampur, a recognized institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The said institution is governed by a duly approved Scheme of Administration, as provided under Section 16-A of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The sole submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that under Section 16-A of the Act, there is no enabling provision which empowers the General Body or the Committee of Management to pass a no confidence motion against any office bearer. It is urged that in absence of any such provision under the Act, the Committee of Management or the General Body cannot arrogate such a power to itself. 3. In support of the said submission, he has placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Riaz Uddin v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2004 (1) AWC 857 and judgment of the learned Single Judge in Committee of Management, Intermediate College, Pindi, Deoria and another v. State of U.P. and others, 2007(9) ADJ 340 . 4. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 4 on the other hand, submitted that there is a specific provisions contained in Clause 10(2) and (3) of the Scheme of Administration for bringing ‘no confidence motion’ against office bearers or members of the Committee of Management. A detailed procedure has also been prescribed for moving such ‘no confidence motion’. It is urged that in such circumstances,it cannot be said that ‘no confidence motion’ passed against petitioner No. 2 was illegal. 5. Section 16-A of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 says that there shall be a Scheme of Administration for every institution. The Scheme of Administration shall amongst other matters provide for the constitution of a Committee of Management vested with authority to manage and conduct the affairs of the institution. Section 16-CC stipulates that the Scheme of Administration shall not be inconsistent with the principles laid down in the Third Schedule. The Scheme of Administration shall amongst other matters provide for the constitution of a Committee of Management vested with authority to manage and conduct the affairs of the institution. Section 16-CC stipulates that the Scheme of Administration shall not be inconsistent with the principles laid down in the Third Schedule. The Third Schedule provides that every Scheme of Administration shall; (1) provide for proper and effective functioning of the Committee of Management; (2) provide for the procedure for constituting the Committee of Management by periodical elections; (3) provide for the qualifications and disqualifications of the members and office-bearers of the Committee of Management and the term of their offices: Provide that no such Scheme shall contain provisions creating monopoly in favour of any particular person, caste, creed, or family; (4) provide for the procedure of calling meetings and the conduct of business at such meetings; (5) provide that all the decisions shall be taken by the Committee of Management and powers of delegation, if any, shall be limited and clearly defined; (6) ensure that the powers and duties of the Committee of Management and its office-bearers are clearly defined; (7) provide for the maintenance and security of property belonging to the institution and also for the utilization of its funds and for the regular checking and auditing of accounts.” 6. Under clause 10(2) and (3) of the Scheme of Administration, a detailed procedure is prescribed for initiating a motion of no confidence against the office bearers and members of the Committee of Management of the institution and the manner in which it is to be passed. The provision relating to passing of no confidence motion against the office bearers or members of the Committee of Management, is in no manner inconsistent with any of the principles contained in the Third Schedule. Even, learned counsel for the petitioners has not made any such submission. 7. In Riaz Uddin (supra), the Court was considering a Scheme of Administration, which did not prescribe for passing of no-confidence motion. Likewise, in Committee of Management, Intermediate College, Pindi (supra) also, there was no provision in the Scheme of Administration for bringing a no confidence motion against the office bearers or members of the Committee of Management. 7. In Riaz Uddin (supra), the Court was considering a Scheme of Administration, which did not prescribe for passing of no-confidence motion. Likewise, in Committee of Management, Intermediate College, Pindi (supra) also, there was no provision in the Scheme of Administration for bringing a no confidence motion against the office bearers or members of the Committee of Management. It was in the above context that the judgments cited holds that in the absence of any specific provision under the Act or the Scheme of Administration, a no-confidence motion cannot be brought against an office bearer. However, there being a specific provision in the Scheme under consideration, the argument advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners does not merit acceptance and is accordingly rejected. 8. No other submission has been advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners. 9. The writ petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.