Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 1148 (ALL)

C/M F. R Islamia Inter College v. State Of U. P.

2020-09-21

PRAKASH PADIA

body2020
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no.1 and 2 and Sri G. K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the respondent no.3. 2. The petitioners have preferred the present writ petition inter-alia with the prayer to quash the order dated 6.7.2020 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly/respondent no.2 with further prayer to issue a mandamus directing the aforesaid respondent to pass fresh order on Management's resolution dated 28.6.2020. 3. The facts in brief as contained in the writ petition are that the institution in question namely F.R. Islamia Inter College, is a recognized and aided Intermediate College, which is a minority institution. The institution in question is run and controlled by the provisions contained under The U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the regulations framed thereunder. There is an approved Scheme of Administration. The last elections of Committee of Management was held on 20.5.2016 in which the petitioner no.2 namely Mahammad Isar Ahmad was elected as Manager/Secretary of the College and the respondent no.3, namely, Mohammad Nafees Ansari was elected as President. The aforesaid election was duly recognized by the respondent no.2/District Inspector of Schools, vide order dated 28.5.2016. 4. Certain disputes arose in the institution in question in respect of financial irregularities committed in the institution. On 15.7.2019 an order was passed by the respondent no.2 attesting the signature of Deputy Manager as Manager for remaining terms. A Writ Petition No.27507 of 2019 (Committee of Management F.R Islamia Inter College and another vs. State of U.P. and 3 others) was filed before this Court, challenging the order dated 15.7.2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly. The writ petition was duly entertained and an interim protection was granted by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 18.9.2019. By the aforesaid order, the operation of the order dated 15.7.2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly was stayed. Further Management of the institution in question was directed to call a meeting of the Committee of Management between 25.9.2019 and 1.10.2019 after service of notice upon the respondent no.3 and 4 along with all other members of the Committee of Management to discuss the special audit report. Further Management of the institution in question was directed to call a meeting of the Committee of Management between 25.9.2019 and 1.10.2019 after service of notice upon the respondent no.3 and 4 along with all other members of the Committee of Management to discuss the special audit report. The order dated 18.9.2019 passed in the aforesaid writ petition is reproduced hereinbelow : “Heard Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri G.K.Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Chandra Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents No.3 and 4 and learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly, approving the removal of the petitioner. The petitioner is a manager of the institution. Sri J.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the order of the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner upon receipt of notice made a requisition to the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly for relevant documents including the resolution passed against the petitioner on the foot of which he was removed. The relevant documents were not provided to the petitioner and the impugned order was passed relying on the aforesaid documents. The defence of the petitioner was disabled by the procedure adopted by the petitioner. It is specifically asserted that the meeting allegedly called to remove the petitioner was convened in breach of the scheme of administration. The persons, who had called the meeting, did not have the authority to convene the meeting. He further contends that the final audit report does not indict the petitioner. The petitioner had pointedly raised a query to the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly indicating the finding against the petitioner regarding misutilization of the funds. The District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly did not respond to the aforesaid request. It is lastly asserted that an audit report is at best an opinion of the auditor. It is not a finding of a competent authority. The matter needs consideration. Learned counsel for the respondents as well as learned Standing Counsel pray for and are granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. List thereafter. Till further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly, shall remain stayed. The matter needs consideration. Learned counsel for the respondents as well as learned Standing Counsel pray for and are granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. List thereafter. Till further orders of this Court, the effect and operation of the order dated 15.07.2019 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly, shall remain stayed. The respondents shall not interfere in the functioning of the petitioner as manager of the institution. The petitioner is directed to call a meeting of the committee of management between 25.09.2019 to 01.10.2019 after service of notice upon the respondents No.3 and 4 along with all other members of the committee of management to discuss the special audit report. The committee of management is shall pass a resolution in accordance with law. The notices of the meeting shall be sent by registered post AD. It shall also be published in a local newspaper having wide circulation. This order does not prohibit the competent authority to investigate the allegations of misutilization of funds if any.” 5. On 13.2.2020 only six members submitted an application before the Manager of the institution in question namely petitioner no.2 for convening the meeting of the Committee of Management to discuss regarding forged resolution dated 28.7.2018. After receiving the aforesaid letter petitioner no.2 contacted the respondent no.3-President of the Committee of Management for giving permission to issue agenda. The respondent no.3 refuse to issue the same. In the aforesaid circumstances on 22.2.2020 a agenda was issued fixing 03.03.2020 for meeting of the Committee of Management. 6. On 29.2.2020 the respondent no.3/President of the institution wrote a letter to the petitioner no.2 referring Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration which provides that meeting of the Committee of Management can be convened only after permission/approval of the President. 7. The meeting of the Committee of Management was held on 03.03.2020. In the aforesaid meeting a resolution was passed that an explanation be sought from the President/Respondent no.3 and in the meantime, the office of the President was handed over to one Dr. Shakir Ali. 8. On 7.3.2020 the petitioner no.2 wrote a letter to the respondent no.4/Incharge Principal intimating him that in the meeting of the Committee of Management dated 19.4.2019 an enquiry committee was constituted to enquire into the serious irregularities committed by him and in this regard a show cause notice was issued to him on 29.4.2019. Shakir Ali. 8. On 7.3.2020 the petitioner no.2 wrote a letter to the respondent no.4/Incharge Principal intimating him that in the meeting of the Committee of Management dated 19.4.2019 an enquiry committee was constituted to enquire into the serious irregularities committed by him and in this regard a show cause notice was issued to him on 29.4.2019. Since no reply was given by him he was directed to submit his explanation and to handover charge of the post of Principal to one Sri Tauqir Siddiqui pending enquiry. In the meanwhile, he was further directed to work on his original post of Lecturer. 9. Vide letter dated 12.3.2020 petitioner no.2 wrote a letter to the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly intimating him in detail regarding management decision for removal of Sri Javed Khalid pending enquiry and to appoint Tauqir Siddiqui Lecturer (Math) as officiating principal. A request was also made for attesting the signature of Tauqir Siddiqui as officiating Principal so that the salary bills of the college be passed timely. The District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly vide order dated 20.3.2020 disapproved the resolution of the management dated 3.3.2020 on the ground that the resolution was passed contrary to Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration. He also proceeded to reject the request of the management for attesting the signatures of newly appointed officiating principal namely Tauqir Siddiqui. It is further observed by him in his order that if the manager wants to convene a meeting he should send agenda of the meeting to the President by registered post in terms of the Clause 9 of the approved Scheme of Administration and the President should take cognizance of the concern agenda and only thereafter take the appropriate proceedings for holding meeting of the management. Copy of the order dated 20.3.2020 is appended as annexure 16 to the writ petition. 10. The petitioner no.2 accepted the observations of the District Inspector of Schools, Bareilly/respondent no.2 and thereafter, send a letter dated 21.5.2020 to the President/respondent no.3 by registered post intimating him that in view of the written request of the members dated 20.5.2020 it has now became necessary to convene the meeting of the Managing Committee. A reply was given by the respondent no.3 vide his letter dated 26.5.2020. A reply was given by the respondent no.3 vide his letter dated 26.5.2020. In the aforesaid letter it is stated by him that in view of the guidelines issued by the Government of India agenda cannot be approved. The respondent no.3 cited on going lock-down and the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs suggesting all the persons above 65 to stay in their homes. 11. Thereafter, again on 1.6.2020 the petitioner no.2 send a letter to the respondent no.3 inviting his attention that meeting of the Managing Committee is necessary. It is further stated in the aforesaid letter that all Government offices has been opened even for the evaluation of answer books. In the circumstances, a request has been made by the petitioner no.2 from respondent no.3 to convene a meeting after following the norms of social distancing. In response to the same, again a letter dated 5.6.2020 was written by the respondent no.3 to the petitioner no.2 intimating him that in view of the guidelines issued by the Government of India, the agenda in the meeting of the Committee of Management cannot be approved. 12. On 10.6.2020 the petitioner no.2 replied the aforesaid letter of the respondent no.3 and along-with reply agenda was also send to him by registered post for his approval. Copy of the aforesaid letter was also forwarded in the office of the respondent no.2 for intimation. A reply was given by the respondent no.3 vide letter dated 15.6.2020 again refusing his permission/approval citing Covid-19. In the meanwhile, on 18.6.2020 six members of the managing committee wrote a letter to the petitioner no.2 for convening the meeting of the committee of management. On 19.6.2020 a agenda was issued for the meeting to be held on 28.6.2020. On 22.6.2020 the respondent no.3 issued a letter cancelling the meeting dated 28.6.2020 citing the guidelines issued by the Government of India. It further appears from perusal of the record that the meeting of the Committee of Management was held on 28.6.2020 and in absence of the approval of the President resolution passed in the aforesaid meeting was forwarded by the petitioners before the respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 passed an order on 6.7.2020 discarding/disapproving the management resolution dated 28.6.2020 on the sole ground that the meeting in question was not convened with the approval of the President. The respondent no.2 passed an order on 6.7.2020 discarding/disapproving the management resolution dated 28.6.2020 on the sole ground that the meeting in question was not convened with the approval of the President. It is further stated in the aforesaid order that the meeting dated 28.6.2020 is contrary to the provisions contained in the Scheme of Administration, therefore, the same is illegal. While passing the aforesaid order the respondent no.2 referred Clause 9(ii) of the Scheme of Administration, copy of the order dated 28.6.2020, which is appended as annexure 37 to the writ petition. Aggrieved against the aforesaid decision taken by him the petitioners have preferred the present writ petition. 13. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 14. The institution in question namely F.R. Islamia Inter College, is a recognized and aided Intermediate College run and controlled by the provisions contained under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and the regulations framed thereunder. The institutuon in question is run and controlled by Scheme of Administration, which was approved by the competent authority. The powers and duties of the President has been mentioned under Clause 15 of the scheme of administration. The same is reproduced hereinbelow :- “Powers and duties of Office-Bearers. The powers and duties of office-bearers shall be as follows : (I) President-(a) To preside at the Meetings of the Committee. (b) To approve the dates for holding meetings and to postpone or adjourn them. (c) To see that this Scheme of Administration is faithfully carried out by all concerned. (d) To sign jointly with the Manager all agreements relating to the College and all deeds of transfer, contract and other documents relating to the immovable property of the institution. (e) To incur expenditure upto a maximum of Rs. 150/-in anticipation of the Committee. (f) To the extent he is so authorised by a resolution of the Committee, to act on its behalf in emergencies when a meeting cannot be called and to report forthwith to the Committee the action taken by him. (g) To exercise such other powers and to perform such other duties as are conferred or imposed on him by this Scheme or by any rule or law for the time being in force.” 15. Apart from the same, the relevant paragraph merely paragraph 9 deals with the meeting of the committee is reproduced below : “Meeting of the Committee. (g) To exercise such other powers and to perform such other duties as are conferred or imposed on him by this Scheme or by any rule or law for the time being in force.” 15. Apart from the same, the relevant paragraph merely paragraph 9 deals with the meeting of the committee is reproduced below : “Meeting of the Committee. (i) Ordinary Meetings - An ordinary meeting of the Committee shall be called by the Manager/Secretary at least once every quarter with the approval of the President. (ii) Extra ordinary or Emergency Meetings - The Manager/Secretary (with the approval of the President) may when necessary and shall on the written requisition of at least once fifth of the elected members containing the resolution of specific subject for consideration, call an emergent meeting of the Committee. (iii) Notice of the Meeting-At least seven clear days notice shall be given for an ordinary meeting of the Committee and three clear days notice for an emergent or extra ordinary meeting. Provided that in case of sending of notice by Post at the last known address of the member nine days before the date of an emergent meeting shall be deemed sufficient service on him in due time. The notice shall contain the agenda and specify the place, date and time of the meeting. (iv) Quorum and adjourned meeting-Six members or one third of the total number of the then members, whichever is greater, shall form the quorum for the meeting. In the absence of the required quorum upto 30 minutes after the time fixed for the commencement of the meeting, the same shall stand adjourned and may be held again the same day or the next day at a time announced by the President at the expiry of the said 30 minutes. No quorum or any other notice shall be required for an adjourned meeting, but no matter shall be taken up there which was not included in the agenda of the meeting which was adjourned for want of quorum.” 16. From the combined reading of the aforesaid clauses it is clear that extra-ordinary or emergent meeting could only be called with the approval of the President and only after written requisition of at least 1/5 of elected members. 17. From the combined reading of the aforesaid clauses it is clear that extra-ordinary or emergent meeting could only be called with the approval of the President and only after written requisition of at least 1/5 of elected members. 17. It is argued by Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel that in case there was no approval of the President then a request can be made by the 1/5 of the elected members and the meeting could be convene. 18. On the other hand Sri G. K. Singh, learned Senior Counsel contended that in order to hold the meeting as per Clause 9 of the approved Scheme of Administration both the things are necessary, i.e., the approval of the President as well as written request of at least 1/5 of the elected members. 19. The Court is of the opinion that Clause 9 (ii) of the scheme are absolutely clear. It is clearly stated in the aforesaid clause that an extra-ordinary emergent meeting could only be called by the Manager/Secretary with the approval of the President and by written request of at least 1/5 elected members. From perusal of the same, it is clear the word “and” has been used in the aforesaid clause and not the word “or”. From perusal of the same it is clear that both the things are necessary for convening the meeting. After taking into consideration the aforesaid clause of the Scheme of Administration the order has been passed by the respondent no.2 on 6.7.2020. The Court is of the opinion that the aforesaid order is absolutely perfect and valid order and does not call for any interference by this Court. 20. It further appears from perusal of the record that under Clause 9(i) of the Scheme of Administration it is provided that the meeting of the Committee of Management shall be called by the Manager/Secretary at least once in every quarter with the approval of the President. It appears from perusal of the record that though time and again the Manager of the institution in question wrote letters to the President to call for a meeting but due to Covid-19 objections were raised by the President not to convene the meeting. It appears from perusal of the record that though time and again the Manager of the institution in question wrote letters to the President to call for a meeting but due to Covid-19 objections were raised by the President not to convene the meeting. It further appears from perusal of the last paragraph of the order impugned that a direction was given to hold the meeting of the general body after following the guidelines issued by the State Government. 21. The every institution is run and controlled by the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. It is provided under sub-Clause 1 of Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration that a meeting of the Committee of Management should be called by the Manager/Secretary at least every quarter with the approval of the President. It appears from perusal of the record that from last so many months no meeting was convened due to Covid-19. It further appears that though the steps were taken by the Manager of the institution to convene the meeting the same could not be held due to the fact that the approval was not given by the President. No institution could run without holding the meeting of the Managing Committee. Time and again the President again refused to hold the meeting by taking a shelter of Covid-19. According to sub-clause (i) of clause 9, a meeting should be convened at least once every quarter by the Manager/Secretary with the approval of the President. 22. This Court, by order dated 18.9.2019 passed in Writ Petition No.27 of 2019 has directed the Manager of the Committee of Management to call a meeting of the Committee of Management between 25.09.2019 to 01.10.2019 after service of notice upon the respondent nos.3 & 4 of aforesaid writ petition along with all other members of the Committee of Management to discuss the special audit report. 23. From the record it appears that the aforesaid direction of this Court has not been complied with and no meeting of Committee of Management, as directed by this Hon'ble Court had been held. 24. As per Clause 9(1) of the Scheme of Administration it is mandatory to hold the meeting of Committee of Management in every quarter. 23. From the record it appears that the aforesaid direction of this Court has not been complied with and no meeting of Committee of Management, as directed by this Hon'ble Court had been held. 24. As per Clause 9(1) of the Scheme of Administration it is mandatory to hold the meeting of Committee of Management in every quarter. The President of the Committee of Management, on one pretext or the other, is neither granting approval for holding meeting of the Committee of Management nor the requisition for holding emergent meeting of the Committee of Management is being approved by the President of the Committee of Management. The administration of the College has to be carried on in a democratic manner which is object of the constitution of the Committee of Management. The unilateral decision of the President of the Committee of Management for not holding the meeting of the Committee of Management is infact abuse of power. The ground taken by the President of the Committee of Management for not grating approval for holding the meeting of the Committee of Management is the guidelines issued by the State Government in view of Covid-19. The college is an Intermediate College. There must be sufficient space for holding meeting of the Committee of Management following the guidelines issued by the State Government for holding a meeting, i.e., social distance. 25. Thus, taking in view of the entire fact and circumstances of the case including the abuse of power by the President, a mandamus is issued directing the President of the Committee of Management to grant its approval for holding the meeting of the Committee of Management as per Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration. The petitioner no.2 is directed to send a requisition for holding a meeting of Committee of Management to the respondent no.3, i.e., President of the Committee of Management. The President of the Committee of Management is directed to grant its approval for holding meeting of the Committee of Management following the norms issued by the State Government regarding Covid-19. 26. The intimation of the meeting along with agenda of the Committee of Management be send to all the members of the Committee of Management and the meeting of the Committee of Management be positively held within a period of six weeks from today. 26. The intimation of the meeting along with agenda of the Committee of Management be send to all the members of the Committee of Management and the meeting of the Committee of Management be positively held within a period of six weeks from today. It is further provided that the Manager will ensure that all the Protocols as prescribed under the guidelines and norms issued by the State Government and Central Government with regard to Covid-19 are followed. 27. With the aforesaid observations the writ petition is disposed off.