JUDGMENT : Moushumi Bhattacharya, J. 1. The writ petitioner is the Secretary of the Managing Committee of Durgapur MAMC Township Modern High School. The writ petitioner has assailed a Memo dated 7th March, 2019 of The West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (the Board and the respondent Nos. 6, 7 and 8 herein) enclosing an order passed by the President of the Ad-hoc Committee of the Board by which, inter alia, the District Inspector of Schools (DI), Paschim Burdwan or the authorised nominee of the President of the Ad-hoc Committee to act as an Administrator of Schools with immediate effect. 2. A brief statement of the undisputed facts leading to the impugned order passed by the Secretary of the Ad-hoc Committee of the Board is stated for a better understanding of the alleged grievance of the writ petitioner. • The term of the Managing Committee of the concerned School was due to expire on 28th October, 2018. • The Headmaster of the School by a letter dated 7th May, 2018, informed the Secretary, West Bengal Board of Secondary Education of (WBBSE) and the Additional district Inspector of Schools (ASI), Paschim Burdwan, complaining against the petitioner with regard to the constitution of the Managing Committee after expiry of its term. In the said letter, the relevant Rule being Rule 9(2) of the Rules for Management of Recognized Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided), 1969 Rules under which the date of election for a Managing Committee is required to be fixed at least sixty days before the expiry of its term. • The Managing Committee suspended the Headmaster on 4th October, 2018 and by a Resolution dated 6th October, 2018 appointed a Teacher-in-Charge to look after the day-to-day administration of the schools. • The Teacher-in-Charge made an application to the Board on 9th October, 2018 for extension of the term of the Managing Committee. • The WBBSE extended the term of the Managing Committee on 10th October, 2018 until 30th April, 2019 or until the completion of the re-constitution of the Managing Committee. This letter was addressed to the Teacher-in-Charge of the School who had made the application before the Board. • The WBBSE extended the term of the Managing Committee on 10th October, 2018 until 30th April, 2019 or until the completion of the re-constitution of the Managing Committee. This letter was addressed to the Teacher-in-Charge of the School who had made the application before the Board. • The Assistant Headmistress by a letter dated 10th October, 2018, informed the Board that the Headmaster of the school has been suspended by the Managing Committee on 5th October, 2018 and requested the Administrator and/or the Secretary of the Board not to accept any letter for extension of the term of the Managing Committee by any teaching staff claiming to be holding to the post of Teacher-in-Charge. • On receipt of the letter dated 10th October, 2018 from the Assistant Headmistress, the Board asked the Teacher-in-Charge to return the extension letter, which was taken back on 12th October, 2018 and by a letter dated 12th November, 2018, the order of extension (granted on 10th October, 2018) was revoked by the Board. This letter was addressed to the Headmaster of the school. • The letter of cancellation of the extension of the term of the Managing Committee was challenged in W.P. No. 24294(W) of 2018 (Managing Committee of the Durgapur MAMC Township Modern High School Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors.), which was disposed of by a letter dated 2nd January, 2018, directing the WBBSE to pass a reasoned order after granting an opportunity of hearing to the Managing Committee, the Headmaster and the Assistant Headmistress of the school. • Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the concerned parties were heard and the President of the Ad-hoc Committee of the Board passed the impugned order dated 5th February, 2019 by which the prayer for extension of the Managing Committee of the School was rejected, the suspension of the Headmaster was held to be disputed and the Administrator was appointed with immediate effect. • The aforesaid order was communicated by a letter dated 7th March, 2019 addressed to the petitioner, which is the subject-matter of challenge in the present writ petition. 3. It should be noted that during the course of hearing, this Court was informed by counsel appearing for the Board that an Administrator had been put in charge of the school on 18th March, 2019. 3. It should be noted that during the course of hearing, this Court was informed by counsel appearing for the Board that an Administrator had been put in charge of the school on 18th March, 2019. On the basis of such submission, an order was passed by this Court on 19th March, 2019 whereby the concerned Authorities were directed to maintain the state of affairs as was existing as on the date of filing of the writ petition, namely, 14th March, 2019, until a decision has been passed in the present proceedings. The reason for passing such an order was due to the challenge made to the decision of the Board to appointment an Administrator which is the very basis of the present proceedings. 4. The primary contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the concerned High School is a non-government and unaided school recognized by the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (WBBSE) and is a self-financed school. Counsel emphasises that the teaching and non-teaching staff are not recruited through the School Service Commission and are appointed by the Managing Committee and the Government is not concerned with any of such affairs. It is further submitted that the amendments to the Rules for Management of Recognized Non-Government Institutions) Aided and Unaided), 1969 as promulgated by Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018, does not apply to the concerned school as the said school is not an institution in terms of the definition in Section 2(n) of the West Bengal School Service Commission Act, 1997. Accordingly, the suspension of the Headmaster or the appointment of the Teacher-in-Charge by the Managing Committee cannot be governed under the amended provisions as the school being self-financed is beyond the ambit of the amendments of the 1969 Rules made by the Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018. Counsel submits that there is no adverse report from any person against the Managing Committee and the written Notes of Arguments of the Managing Committee were not considered at the hearing on 5th February, 2018 leading to the impugned decision by the President of the Ad-hoc Committee. 5. Counsel submits that there is no adverse report from any person against the Managing Committee and the written Notes of Arguments of the Managing Committee were not considered at the hearing on 5th February, 2018 leading to the impugned decision by the President of the Ad-hoc Committee. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (the Board), relies on Rule 9(2) of the 1969 Rules under which the date of election of a Managing Committee for the purpose of re-constitution shall be fixed at least sixty days before the expiry of the term of the existing Committee. Counsel submits that the present Managing Committee failed to comply with the relevant Rule and instead chalked out the proposed agenda by a Resolution dated 6th October, 2018, which was only 23 days prior to the expiry of the tenure of the Managing Committee. Counsel places emphasis on the fact that the Headmaster of school was placed under suspension with effect from 4th October, 2018, which was in violation of the Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018 and Rules 28B ((b) and (c)) thereunder which provides for the powers and duties of a Committee of a Recognized Non-Government Unaided Institution which includes, inter alia, control of the service of such appointed teaching or non-teaching staff as per law or agreement made between the said Committee and the concerned teaching or non-teaching staff (Rule 208B (b) also to intimate the Board of any matter pertaining to misconduct of any teaching or non-teaching staff of the institution (Rule 208B (c). Counsel further submits that the Board extended the term of the Managing Committee on 10th October, 2018 without being informed by the Teacher-in-Charge/Managing Committee/Secretary that the Headmaster had been placed under suspension by the Managing Committee. It was only from the letter written by the Assistant Headmistress dated 10th October, 2018 that the Board was made aware that the Headmaster had been suspended and the Teacher-in-Charge had applied for extension of the tenure of the Managing Committee, bypassing the Assistant Headmistress who was the second-in-command of the school at the relevant point of time. It was only from the letter written by the Assistant Headmistress dated 10th October, 2018 that the Board was made aware that the Headmaster had been suspended and the Teacher-in-Charge had applied for extension of the tenure of the Managing Committee, bypassing the Assistant Headmistress who was the second-in-command of the school at the relevant point of time. Counsel relies on Rule 4 (2b) of the Notification issued by the Board on 1st October, 1977 which provides, inter alia, that in case the head of the institution fails to convene the meeting for the purpose of approving the election programme for holding election for re-constitution of the Committee, the Secretary, with the approval of the Committee, shall forthwith report the matter to the DI of Schools who after due consideration may entrust the work pertaining to the election of the Committee to the Assistant Headmaster/Headmistress or to the senior-most approved Assistant Teacher of the institution as the case may be. She further relies on a Memo (No. 438) dated 9th September, 1985 published by the Government of West Bengal, Education Department, Rule 8(1)(1a) under which the Executive Committee shall have the power to appoint an Administrator or Ad-hoc Committee in respect of any institution where the term of the Committee has expired but the Committee has not been reconstituted. Counsel emphasizes that the Managing Committee of the school has violated all the above Rules and hence the order passed by the Board on 5th February, 2019 superseding the Managing Committee and appointing an Administrator under Rule 8(1)(1a) of the Rules of 9th September, 1985, is justified. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 and 10, being the Headmaster and the Assistant Headmaster/Headmistress of the school relies on Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018 Rule 28B(c) as well as the amendments to the 1969 Rules as stated in the said notification. The effect of such amendments, inter alia, to Rule 28 of the 1969 Rules is that Sub-Rules (1), (1a), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (8a) and (8b) have been omitted. The effect of such amendments, inter alia, to Rule 28 of the 1969 Rules is that Sub-Rules (1), (1a), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (8a) and (8b) have been omitted. Among the sub-rules omitted, Sub-Rule (8), (8a) and (8b) are of importance as the said sub-rules provided, inter alia, (before amendment) that in both aided and unaided institutions, the Committee shall have the power, subject to the prior approval of the Board, to remove or dismiss permanent or temporary teachers or other employees for which a procedure was provided for under Sub-Rule (8). Under Sub-Rules (8a) and (8b), now omitted, the Committee had the power to impose penalties on the concerned permanent or temporary teacher, including reduction of pay with the prior approval of the Board also to suspend by an order of the appointing authority for reasons under Sub-Rule (8b). The amendment to Sub-Rule (9)(7a) is of further importance as the power of a Committee to suspend a teacher or an employee in the interest of the institution has been omitted by the Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018. Under the said notification (216 dated 8th March, 2018), the West Bengal Board of Secondary Education (Appointment, Confirmation, Conduct and Discipline of Teachers and Non-Teaching Staff) Rules, 2018 has come into force. After the amendment, the Committee of a recognized non-government unaided institution shall only have the power to intimate the Board of any matter pertaining to misconduct of any teacher or non-teaching staff of the institution (Rule 208B (c) and the Board on receipt of such information will take steps in terms of Rule 5(2) and (6) of 2018 Rules. Rule 5 relates to disciplinary proceedings which may be initiated by the Board for conducting a preliminary investigation (by an officer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector of Schools) against any teacher or non-teaching staff upon receipt of a complaint pertaining to the misconduct of such teacher, from the Committee or the Administrator or head of a institution. Rule 6 relates to an order of suspension passed by the Board against a teacher or non-teaching staff for any of the reasons provided for under the sub-rule. 7. Rule 6 relates to an order of suspension passed by the Board against a teacher or non-teaching staff for any of the reasons provided for under the sub-rule. 7. The reading of the Rules, post-amendment, shows that the powers relied on by the Managing Committee in suspending the Headmaster and appointing the Teacher-in-Charge had been taken away by the Amendments on the date on which such actions were taken by the Managing Committee. 8. The effect of the amendments as mentioned in Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018, is that on 4th October, 2018, the Managing Committee of the School (represented through its Secretary as the writ petitioner in this proceeding) had no power to suspend the Headmaster and appoint the Teacher-in-Charge. If this is correct, the appointment of the Teacher-in-Charge for conducting the election is also in violation of the Rules and cannot be sustained in law. Therefore, the impugned order dated 5th February, 2019 passed by the President of the Ad-hoc Committee of the Board and the communication of the said impugned order by the letter dated 7the March, 2019 is also not amenable to challenge in the present proceeding. Second, the tenure of the Managing Committee can be extended if the condition envisaged in Rule 4(2b) of the communication No. S/591 dated 1st October, 1977 issued by WBBSE, namely, that the head of the institution fails or neglects to convene the meeting for the purpose of approving the election programme for holding the election for re-constitution of the Committee. 9. As rightly pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 and 10, the writ petitioner has not made out a case of the Headmaster of the school failing to convene a meeting for an election for re-constitution of the Committee. In any event, if such failure had occurred, the Secretary, with the approval of the Committee, was under an obligation to report the failure of the head of the institution to the concerned District Inspector of Schools (under Rule 4(2b)). The District Inspector, in turn, upon due consideration of the matter reported, had the option to entrust the work pertaining to the election of the Committee of the Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress or in the absence of either of senior-most approved Assistant Teacher of the institution. 10. The District Inspector, in turn, upon due consideration of the matter reported, had the option to entrust the work pertaining to the election of the Committee of the Assistant Headmaster/Assistant Headmistress or in the absence of either of senior-most approved Assistant Teacher of the institution. 10. The above shows that none of the conditions as envisaged under the relevant rules existed on the date, namely on 9th October, 2018 when the application for extension of the tenure of the Managing Committee of the concerned schools was made by the Teacher-in-Charge appointed by the Managing Committee by its Resolution dated 6th October, 2018. Even otherwise, the entire exercise of ensuring the continuation of the existing Managing Committee cannot be supported since a Managing Committee of an institution represents a democratically elected body and is an expression of the collective will of the teaching and non-teaching staff of an institution. The conduct of the writ petitioner in suppressing the fact of the suspension of the Headmaster from the Board and authorizing a Teacher-in-Charge to take requisite steps for extending the tenure of the Managing Committee bypassing the Assistant Headmistress of the school are further instances of acts on the part of the Managing Committee and its Secretary to circumvent the procedure laid down under the relevant rules. 11. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the Notification No. 216 dated 8th March, 2018, particularly the amendments to the Rules for management of Recognized Non-Government Institutions (Aided and Unaided), 1969, do not apply to the present case by reason of the concerned school being self-financed, is not a tenable argument since it is evident that the 1969 Rules applied to both aided as well as unaided institutions. Further, by the relevant amendments, Rule 28B has been inserted which deal with powers and duties of a Committee of a Recognized Non-Government unaided institution. It is under Rule 28B that the committee has been put under an obligation to intimate the Board of any matter pertaining to misconduct of any teaching or non-teaching staff of an institution (Rule 28B(c)). Therefore, it is clear that the amendments relied upon by learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 and 10 (Headmaster and Assistant Headmaster) are clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. 12. Therefore, it is clear that the amendments relied upon by learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 9 and 10 (Headmaster and Assistant Headmaster) are clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. 12. In view of the above discussion, this Court sees no reason to interfere with the letter of the Board to the petitioner dated 7th March, 2019, enclosing the impugned order passed by the President, Ad-hoc committee of the Board on 5th February, 2019. In view of the writ petitioner having acted in blatant violation of the relevant rules, the writ petition must fail for want of merit. 13. W.P. 6026 of 2019 is, accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on priority basis upon compliance of all requisite formalities.