JUDGMENT : SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J. 1. Supplementary Affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the petitioners is taken on record. 2. Mr. Som Kartik, Advocate, on the instructions of Smt. Arunima Risal Singh, submits that he has instructions to assist the court in the present matter, but he did not come with proper application as provided under the Rules of the Court, thus his prayer is rejected. 3. Heard Mr. Apoorva Tewari and Mr. Zainuddin Mohammad Siddiqui, learned counsels for the petitioners, Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh, learned Chief Standing Counsel and Mr. Rajeev Singh Chauhan, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the opposite parties. 4. Under challenge is the order dated 21-11-2023 passed by the Joint Director of Education, VIth Region, Lucknow, by which, the earlier order dated 14-07-2022, for appointing the Authorized Controller in the institution in question, is extended for further period of six months. It is further provided in the order that the election of the Committee of Management, shall also be conducted as per the Model Scheme of Administration. 5. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the institution, namely, Cetennial Higher Secondary School (now Inter College), Golaganj, Lucknow, an Authorized Controller was appointed vide order dated 14-07-2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education, and thereafter, vide impugned order dated 21-11-2023, the same has been extended for further period of six months, though without considering the fact that the election of the Committee of Management of the institution in question, has already been held on the strength of the order passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow, by virtue of which an Observer was appointed and the election was held by the Authorized Controller on 03-04-2023, wherein Dr. R.R. Loyal, has been elected as Manager alongwith other persons for the different posts in the Committee of Management. 6. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is allegedly a dispute with respect to the parent society and the challenge was made vide Writ C No. 2124 of 2022, wherein an interim order was passed on 03-04-2023. The operative portion of the order dated 03-04-2023 is quoted herein-under: “With consent of parties, let status quo prior to the holding of elections be maintained by the parties. The operative portion of the order dated 03-04-2023 is quoted herein-under: “With consent of parties, let status quo prior to the holding of elections be maintained by the parties. The authorized controller, if, has been appointed prior to the order dated 31.03.2023 shall continue till next date of listing as well as the single hand operation, if it is in effect, prior to the passing of its order dated 31.03.2023 shall continue till next date of listing for these two institutions only.” 7. Referring the aforesaid, he submits that later on, the matter was finally heard and the Judgment was reserved in three writ petitions namely, Writ C No. 8521 of 2022, Writ C No. 2124 of 2022 and Writ C No. 1046 of 2023 and subsequently, the matter was released and thereafter, it was listed for hearing, but, so far as the interim order dated 03-04-2023 is concerned, that is not extended, which is an undisputed fact, and this fact is also skipped by the Joint Director, which indicates that there is non application of mind on part of opposite party no. 2. 8. Further contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that since the valid election of the Committee of Management of the institution, has already been held, therefore, as per the provision of the government order dated 20-10-2008, it is incumbent upon the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow to take a decision on the attestation of the signature of the newly elected Manager of the Committee of Management within a period of two weeks, and if there is any legal impediment, he may refer the matter to the Regional Level Committee and in such event the Regional Level Committee will take decision within further period of one month. He added that the election of the Committee of Management is held on 03-04-2023, but, even after passing of about one year, the District Inspector of Schools is still sitting tight over the matter, while ignoring the government order dated 20-10-2008 as he has neither passed any order of attestation of the signature of newly elected Manager nor he has referred the matter to the Regional Level Committee, uptill date. 9. 9. Concluding his arguments, he submits that vide order dated 21-11-2023, the Joint Director of Education, without considering the fact that the election of the Committee of Management has already been held, directed that the election of the Committee of Management, be conducted as per the Model Scheme of Administration. Further submits that the impugned order is passed in so cursory manner as the Joint Director did not take care that whether the Model Scheme of Administration or the approved scheme of administration would be applicable, whereas, the fact remains that the institution has it's own approved scheme of administration. Thus, submission is that the order dated 28-11-2023, to the extent of a direction for holding election afresh, is against the settled proposition of law and without application of mind, therefore, submission is that the same may be quashed. Further this court may also be pleased to direct the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow to take a decision on the attestation of the signature of the newly elected Manager of the Committee of Management of the institution as per the provisions prescribed in the government order dated 20-10-2008. 10. In support of his contentions, he has also placed reliance on the Judgment and order reported in 2009 SCC Online All 335, State of Uttar Pradesh through Special Secretary Shiksha Anubhag IX, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh Lucknow and Others Vs. Committee of Management, D.A.V. Inter College, Mahoba through its Manager and Another and has referred paragraph no. 5 of the said Judgment, which is quoted herein-under: “5. The aforesaid two judgments of the Apex Court squarely apply here also. It cannot be said that an interim order passed for a limited period would continue automatically if for one or the other reason the case could not be taken up by the Court. If Court has passed interim order for a limited period, unless that order is extended, it would not continue automatically. The view taken by the Hon'ble Single Judge is in the teeth of the law laid down by the Apex Court, as discussed above and, therefore, cannot sustain.” 11. If Court has passed interim order for a limited period, unless that order is extended, it would not continue automatically. The view taken by the Hon'ble Single Judge is in the teeth of the law laid down by the Apex Court, as discussed above and, therefore, cannot sustain.” 11. Placing reliance on above, he submits that the Division Bench of this court has held that if an interim order is passed for a limited period, the same would not continue automatically, unless extended specifically and therefore, submission is that the case of the present petitioners is squarely-covered with the ratio of Judgment, abovesaid. 12. On the other hand, counsel appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the contentions aforesaid and submitted that initial order dated 14-07-2022, is not challenged by the petitioners, by virtue of which the Authorized Controller is appointed in the institution in question, and therefore, challenging the subsequent order, is not permissible under the law. 13. Adding his arguments, he submits that since the issue with respect to parent society is under challenge in Writ C No. 2124 of 2023 alongwith other connected writ petitions and unless these writ petitions are decided, it is not open to the Joint Director of Education or the District Inspector of Schools to take a decision with respect to the institution in question, which is being run by any parental society. He next submits that infact looking into the controversy, initially on 03-04-2023, a coordinate Bench of this court has passed an order, while directing that the parties shall maintain status-quo with respect of holding the election and therefore, the intent of the coordinate Bench of this court is very clear that the dispute in question is of such in nature, wherein the interference is warranted and therefore, this would be too early to take a decision on the issue with respect to the attestation of the signature of the Manager of the Committee of Management in question. Thus, submission is that the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. 14. Thus, submission is that the petitioners are not entitled for any relief. 14. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of the material placed on record, it transpires that a dispute arose after the election of the Committee of Management is held on 03-04-2023 and subsequently, the Joint Director of Education has passed the order on 21-11-2023, while directing that the election of the Committee of Management of the institution be held again while ignoring the fact that earlier, the election of the Committee of Management, is taken place and the same is still intact. 15. When this court examines the aforesaid matter in facts and law, it transpires that the petitioners are aggrieved with the inaction of the District Inspector of Schools while he has not taken any decision with respect to attestation of the signature of the newly elected Manager. 16. From perusal of the government order dated 20-10-2008, it transpires that after the election is held, the District Inspector of Schools is under the bounden duty to take a decision with respect to the attestation of signature of the elected Manager of the Committee of Management of the institution within period of two weeks and if he thinks that there is some legal impediment, he will refer the matter to the Joint Director of Education to take a decision on the same, but, in so far as the present matter is concerned, it is not in dispute that no decision has been taken by the District Inspector of Schools and further, it has not been referred to the Joint Director. 17. 17. The sheet anchor of the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioners is that the interim order dated 03-04-2023, passed in Writ C No. 2124 of 2023 alongwith other connected writ petitions, is not extended after the matter is released, by the coordinate Bench of this court and when this court goes into the settled proposition of law, it transpires that it is trite law that if an interim order is passed for a limited period of time and that is not extended further by any specific order, then there would be no existence of interim order and in this event, there is no interim order in existence and thus, there is no any bar to take a decision by the District Inspector of Schools with respect to the attestation of the signature of the newly elected Manager. 18. This court has also taken note of the fact that there is not a single whisper in the impugned order dated 21-11-2023 that the election of the Committee of Management dated 03-04-203 is any way in the knowledge of the Joint Director of the Education and it seems that under the impression that there is no election held, an order dated 21-11-2023 is passed while directing that a fresh election be held. 19. Considering upon the aforesaid submissions and discussions, this court is of the considered opinion that in so far as the part of the impugned order, by which it is directed that a fresh election be held, is concerned, that is erroneous and without application of mind and hence the same is hereby quashed. 20. Further direction is given to the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow to take a fresh decision in the matter of attestation of the signature of the Manager of the Committee of Management of the institution concerned within a period of two weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him and if he feels that there is some legal impediment, it is open to him to refer the matter to the Regional Level Committee, as is provided under the government order dated 20-10-2008. 21. It is also clarified that the extension of period of the Authorized Controller in the institution in question, would be abide by the further decision taken by the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow or the Regional Level Committee. 22. 21. It is also clarified that the extension of period of the Authorized Controller in the institution in question, would be abide by the further decision taken by the District Inspector of Schools, Lucknow or the Regional Level Committee. 22. The issues/dispute of parent society or Committee of Management is always open for challenge. 23. The writ petition is allowed, accordingly.