JUDGMENT : Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai, J. 1. The above two writ petitions were connected by order of this Court and had, therefore, been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. One Ravindra Singh Chauhan has been impleaded as respondent no. 4 in Writ – C No. 42499 of 2023 and as respondent no. 5 in Writ – C No. 12426 of 2022. Ravindra Singh Chauhan shall be referred as respondent no. 4 in the present judgment. 2. The facts of the case are that Gram Shiksha Samiti, Kasimpur Power House, District Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Society’) is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Act, 1860’) and its registration stands renewed for a period of five years w.e.f. 17.12.2020. The Society runs an educational institution named as Nawab Singh Chauhan Gramodaya Inter College, Kasimpur Power House, Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as, ‘College’). The College is a recognized institution as defined in Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Act, 1921’) and is governed by the Act, 1921 and the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘Act, 1971’). 3. The bye-laws of the Society describe the different categories of members of the general body of the Society and prescribe the qualifications for being enrolled as member of the Society and the manner in which the governing body of the Society shall be elected and constituted. The bye-laws of the Society do not provide that the members of the general body of the Society or the elected office-bearers of the governing body of the Society shall also be the members of the general body of the College and members of the Committee of Management of the College. 4. The Scheme of Administration of the College stipulates, in Clause -3, a general body of the College different from the general body of the Society. The Scheme of Administration specifies the different types of members of the general body of the College and classifies them as patron members, life members, ordinary members and as special / distinguished members. The Scheme of Administration does not provide that the members of the general body of the Society shall also automatically be members of the general body of the College. The Scheme of Administration does not provide that the members of the general body of the Society shall also automatically be members of the general body of the College. The Scheme of Administration further provides the qualification required to be a member of the general body of the College, the procedure for enrolling the members and also provides that the College shall be managed by a Committee of Management elected in accordance with the Scheme of Administration. Clause -8 of the Scheme of Administration prescribes that the Committee of Management shall consist of fifteen members out of which three members shall be ex-officio members and twelve members shall be elected by the general body of the College from amongst the members of the general body of the College itself and in the manner provided in the Scheme of Administration. The term of the Committee of Management is five years. Clause -11(3) of the Scheme of Administration provides that the list of members of the general body of the College shall be declared three months before the five year term of the Committee of Management expires and the list shall be communicated to the members of the general body of the College. Clause -26 specifically notes that the College shall be managed in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration and any rule or order issued by the Registrar -Firms, Societies and Chits shall not be applicable on the general body of the College or on its executive committee. 5. The last election of the Committee of Management of the College was held on 1.1.2017 in which one Shri Vipin Kumar Chauhan was elected as Manager and his signatures were attested vide order dated 18.1.2017 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as, ‘DIOS’). The petitioner in Writ – C No. 12426 of 2022 claims that subsequently another election was held on 5.12.2021 in which Smt. Niharika Chauhan, the petitioner no. 2, was elected as Manager and the requisite documents to attest her signatures as Manager were sent to the DIOS. Respondent no. 4 also set up a rival election allegedly held on 28.11.2021 claiming to be elected as Manager. 2, was elected as Manager and the requisite documents to attest her signatures as Manager were sent to the DIOS. Respondent no. 4 also set up a rival election allegedly held on 28.11.2021 claiming to be elected as Manager. As rival claims regarding the elections were set up by different parties, the DIOS vide his letter dated 15.12.2021 referred the matter to the Regional Level Committee and also by his order dated 26.3.2022 passed under Section 5 of the Act, 1971 directed that the accounts of the College would be operated by the Finance and Accounts Officer (Secondary Education), Aligarh and the Principal of the College. 6. The Regional Level Committee vide its decision dated 29.3.2022 rejected the rival elections set up by the parties on the ground that both the elections were held on a list which was not registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 (as amended in 2013). Consequently, by order dated 30.3.2022, the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Division, Aligarh appointed an Authorized Controller in the College and directed that elections to elect the Committee of Management of the College be held on the list of members of the general body of the Society registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. 7. The orders dated 26.3.2022 passed by the DIOS, the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee and 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Division, Aligarh have been challenged in Writ – C No. 12426 of 2022 in which a further prayer has been made that the Regional Level Committee be directed to pass fresh orders on the reference made to it by the DIOS through his letter dated 15.12.2021. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent no. 4 opposing the claim raised in Writ – C No. 12426 of 2022. The stand of the respondent no. 4 as taken in his counter affidavit to challenge the claim of the petitioners shall be referred while narrating the arguments of the counsel for the respondents. 8. While Writ -C No. 12426 of 2022 was pending in this Court, the petitioners again held elections to elect the Committee of Management and its office bearers. The elections were held on 10.9.2023 in which petitioner no. 2 was elected as Manager. The requisite documents were sent to the DIOS for attesting the signatures of petitioner no. 2 as Manager. While Writ -C No. 12426 of 2022 was pending in this Court, the petitioners again held elections to elect the Committee of Management and its office bearers. The elections were held on 10.9.2023 in which petitioner no. 2 was elected as Manager. The requisite documents were sent to the DIOS for attesting the signatures of petitioner no. 2 as Manager. It also appears that respondent no. 4 also set up a rival election dated 3.9.2023 claiming to have been elected as Manager. The petitioners as well as respondent no. 4 both claimed that their elections were held on the basis of lists registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. Another election dated 10.9.2023 was held by the Authorized Controller on a list of members registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 and in the said election, the respondent no. 4 is shown to have been elected as Manager. The requisite documents were also sent by the Authorized Controller to the DIOS for appropriate decision. The DIOS vide his order dated 14.9.2023 rejected the elections set up by the petitioners and respondent no. 4 but recognized the election held by the Authorized Controller on 10.9.2023 on the ground that in view of the order dated 30.3.2022 of the Joint Director only the Authorized Controller had the power to hold the elections of the Committee of Management and its officer bearers. Consequently, the DIOS vide his order dated 14.9.2023 attested the signatures of respondent no. 4, as the Manager of the Committee of Management of the College. The order dated 14.9.2023 has been challenged in Writ – C No. 42499 of 2023. 9. It was argued by the counsel for the petitioners that the general body of the College is different and separate from the general body of the Society and the members of the general body of the College are enrolled in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration approved by the Director of Education and not in accordance with the bye-laws of the Society. The members of the general body of the Society are not automatically members of the general body of the College and they have to be separately enrolled as members of the general body of the College in the manner prescribed in the Scheme of Administration. The members of the general body of the Society are not automatically members of the general body of the College and they have to be separately enrolled as members of the general body of the College in the manner prescribed in the Scheme of Administration. It was argued that members of the general body of the Society have no right to participate in the elections of the Committee of Management of the College or in the meetings of the general body of the College if they have not been separately enrolled as members of the general body of the College. It was argued that Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 applies only to the list of members of a society registered under the Act, 1860 and the list of members of an institution governed by the Act, 1921 is not required to, and can not be, registered under the Act, 1860. It was argued that the composition and constitution of the Committee of Management of an institution is to be in accordance with the provisions of Act, 1921 and the Scheme of Administration approved by the Director and not by Act, 1860. It was argued that the elections to elect the Committee of Management had to be held in accordance with the Scheme of Administration, therefore, the Committee of Management and its office-bearers had to be elected by members of the general body of the College and not by members of the general body of the Society. It was argued that the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee rejecting the elections set up by the petitioners only on the ground that the said elections were held on a list which had not been registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 and also so far as it directs that the elections to elect the Committee of Management be held on a list registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 ignores the aforesaid aspect and for the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee and the consequential order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education appointing an Authorized Controller to manage the College are contrary to law. It was further argued that as the elections dated 10.9.2023 recognized by the DIOS vide his order dated 14.9.2023, have been held by the members of the general body of the Society and not by the members of the general body of the College, therefore, the order dated 14.9.2023 passed by the DIOS is also contrary to law. It was further argued that the validity of the order dated 14.9.2023 is dependent on the legality of the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee and the consequential order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education which are bad in law and for the said reason, the order dated 14.9.2023 passed by the DIOS, Aligarh is also contrary to law. It was argued that for the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee, the order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education and the order dated 14.9.2023 passed by the DIOS are liable to be quashed. 10. Rebutting the arguments of the counsel for the petitioners, the Standing Counsel representing the State respondents and the counsel for respondent no. 4 have argued that the orders challenged in the present petition are based on the Government Order dated 21.11.2008 which directs that in the Scheme of Administration of an institution governed by the Act, 1921, there shall be a clause providing that the members of the general body of the parent society, i.e., the Society which manages the Institution, shall elect the Committee of Management of the Institution. It was argued that for the aforesaid reasons, the election set-up by the petitioners were not in accordance with law in as much as admittedly, the elections were held by the general body of the College and the office-bearers were elected by an electoral College which consisted of persons who were not members of the general body of the Society. It was argued that vide order dated 30.3.2022, an Authorized Controller was appointed in the Institution who was authorized to hold the elections of the Committee of Management of the College and its office-bearers on a list of members of the Society registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. The elections were held on 10.9.2023 electing the respondent no. 4 as Manager. The elections were held on 10.9.2023 electing the respondent no. 4 as Manager. It was argued that the DIOS, vide his order dated 14.9.2023, has rightly recognized the elections held on 10.9.2023 because as a consequence of the order dated 30.3.2022, only the Authorized Controller had the jurisdiction to hold the elections of the Committee of Management and its office bearers. It was argued that for the aforesaid reasons, there is no illegality in the order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee, the order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education and the order dated 14.9.2023 passed by the DIOS and the petitions are liable to be dismissed. 11. I have considered the submissions of the counsel for the parties. 12. Before proceeding further, it would be apt to consider the provisions of the Act, 1921 pertaining to the Scheme of Administration of an institution governed by the Act, 1921. 13. Section 16-A of the Act, 1921 starts with a non-obstante clause and provides that notwithstanding anything in any law, document, or decree or order of a Court or other instrument, there shall be a Scheme of Administration for every institution which, amongst other matters, shall provide for the constitution of a Committee of Management vested with the authority to manage and conduct the affairs of the institution. Section 16-A(5) of the Act, 1921 provides that the Scheme of Administration of every institution shall be subject to the approval of the Director and no amendment to or change in the Scheme of Administration shall be made without the prior approval of the Director. The proviso to Section 16-A(5) states that where the Director refuses to approve an amendment or change in the Scheme of Administration, the State Government may, if it is satisfied that the proposed amendment or change is in the interest of the institution, order the Director to approve the same and thereupon the Director shall act accordingly. Section 16-A(6) provides that every recognized institution shall be managed in accordance with the Scheme of Administration framed under and in accordance with subsection (1) to (5) and Sections 16-B and 16-C of the Act, 1921. Section 16-A(6) provides that every recognized institution shall be managed in accordance with the Scheme of Administration framed under and in accordance with subsection (1) to (5) and Sections 16-B and 16-C of the Act, 1921. Section 16-C of the Act, 1921 provides that when a Scheme of Administration is submitted to the Director for approval, the Director shall, within the time prescribed, either approve the draft Scheme of Administration or suggest any alteration or modification therein and in case, the Director suggests any alteration or modification in the Scheme of Administration, he shall intimate the reasons therefor to the institution and shall afford an opportunity to the institution to make a representation within the prescribed time. Section 16-C further specifies that if the Director does not suggest any alteration or modification in the draft Scheme of Administration within the time prescribed by regulations, the draft Scheme of Administration shall be deemed to have been approved. Section 16-C(2) provides that the Director may either approve the Scheme of Administration as submitted before him in its original form or subject to the alteration or modification suggested or with any other changes as may appear to him to be just and proper. Section 16-CCC of the Act, 1921 provides that where any Scheme of Administration has been approved under Sections 16-A, 16-B or 16-C at any time before the commencement of the Act, 1980 (which incorporated certain amendments in Act, 1921) and such Scheme of Administration is inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, 1921, the Director shall send, within a period of three years from such commencement, a notice to the institution suggesting any alteration or modification in the Scheme of Administration and requiring the institution to submit a fresh Scheme of Administration or to amend or alter the existing Scheme. While suggesting the alterations, the Director shall give his reasons therefor and shall also afford an opportunity to the institution to make a representation against the alteration or amendment and may approve the Scheme of Administration either in its original form or subject to any alteration or modification suggested by him or with any other changes as may appear to him to be just and proper. 14. The Third Schedule of the Act, 1921 enumerates the principles on which a Scheme of Administration shall be approved. 14. The Third Schedule of the Act, 1921 enumerates the principles on which a Scheme of Administration shall be approved. The principles, in short, are that every Scheme of Administration shall provide for proper and effective functioning of the Committee of Management, the constitution of the Committee of Management by periodical elections, the qualifications of the members and office-bearers of the Committee of Management and the term of their offices, the procedure for calling meetings and the conduct of business at such meetings and the Scheme of Administration shall also provide that all decisions shall be taken by the Committee of Management. The Scheme of Administration shall clearly define the powers and duties of the Committee of Management and its office-bearers. The Scheme of Administration shall also include provisions for maintenance and security of property belonging to the institution and also for the utilization of its funds as well as for the regular checking and auditing of accounts. Regulation 14 in Chapter I of the Regulations framed under the Act, 1921 also relate to the framing of Scheme of Administration which reiterate the principles of the Third Schedule and the provisions from 16-A to 16-CCC of the Act, 1921. 15. A reading of Section 16-D shows that the affairs of an institution have to be managed strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. Sub-clause (vi) and (vii) of Section 16-D provide that where the draft Scheme of Administration of an institution has not been submitted within the time allowed therefor under Section 16-B or that the management of the institution is being conducted otherwise than in accordance with the Scheme of Administration or the affairs of the institution are being otherwise mismanaged or the Scheme of Administration in relation to an institution, approved before the commencement of the Intermediate Education Amendment Act, 1980 is inconsistent with the provisions of the Act, 1921 and the management of the institution has failed to alter or modify it within a reasonable time despite notice under Section 16-CCC, the Director may refer the case to the Board of Education for withdrawal of recognition of such institution or issue notice to the Committee of Management to show cause within thirty days from the date of receipt of such notice why an order under sub-section (4) should not be made. Clause -4 of Section 16-D provides that where the Committee of Management of the institution fails to show cause or where the Director is, after considering the cause shown by the Committee of Management, satisfied that any of the grounds mentioned in sub-section (3) exist, i.e., where the management of the institution is being conducted otherwise than in accordance with the Scheme of Administration or the provisions of the Scheme of Administration are inconsistent with the provisions of Act, 1921 and despite notice the management fails to alter or modify the Scheme of Administration within reasonable time, the Director may recommend to the State Government to appoint an Authorized Controller for that institution and thereupon the State Government may authorize the Authorized Controller to take over the management of such institution and its properties. 16. A reading of Section 16-D clearly indicates that the management of an institution has to be conducted strictly in accordance with the provisions of the approved Scheme of Administration and any transgression from the provisions of the Scheme of Administration would invite action under Section 16-D(4) of the Act, 1921 putting the existing Committee of Management under suspension and appointment of an Authorized Controller in the institution. 17. It is also apparent from a reading of Section 16-A to Section 16-D that it is only an approved Scheme of Administration which is to govern the management of the institution. 18. The Act, 1921 does not require that the list of members of the general body of an institution should be registered under the Act, 1860 or under any other legislative enactments. An institution governed by Act, 1921, merely because it is run by a Society registered under the Act, 1860, is not itself a Society registered under the Act, 1860, therefore, the list of members of the general body of such an institution is not required to be registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. Under Section 4B of the Act, 1860, the Registrar has the jurisdiction to register only the list of members of the general body of a Society which is registered under the Act, 1860. The Act, 1860 and Act, 1921 operate in distinct fields and in case of any conflict between the two, Section 16-A shall prevail because of the non-obstante clause in the provision. The Act, 1860 and Act, 1921 operate in distinct fields and in case of any conflict between the two, Section 16-A shall prevail because of the non-obstante clause in the provision. The Act, 1921 does not provide that the general body of the parent society, i.e., the Society which runs the institution, would necessarily be the electoral College for the elections of the Committee of Management of the institution or its office bearers. There is no provision in the Act, 1921 prohibiting constitution of a general body of an institution different and separate from the general body of the parent society which runs the institution. Any provision in the Scheme of Administration providing for a general body of the institution separate and different from the general body of the parent society would not be invalid. 19. It was held by the Division Bench of this Court in Committee of Management Hindu Inter College and Ors. vs. Regional Deputy D E and Ors. 1988 (14) AIILR 376 that Section 16-A of the Act, 1921 is a complete code by itself so far as the constitution of Committee of Management of recognized institutions is concerned and the Act, 1921 and Act, 1860 operate in distinct fields. The observations of the Division Bench are reproduced below : - “[3] The submission is misconceived and must be rejected. Section 16A of the Intermediate Education Act is a complete Code by itself in so far as the constitution of the Committee of Management of recognised institutions and the disputes pertaining to the management of institution are concerned. It begins with a non-obstante clause and says:-- Notwithstanding anything in any law, document or decree or order of a Court or other instrument,..... It provides that there shall be a Scheme of Administration for every institution which shall provide, amongst other matters, for the constitution of a Committee of Management vested with authority to manage and conduct of the affairs of the institution. The Scheme of Administration has to be approved by the Director of Education. The provision obligates that every recognised institution shall manage its affairs in accordance with that Scheme. The Scheme of Administration has to be approved by the Director of Education. The provision obligates that every recognised institution shall manage its affairs in accordance with that Scheme. Then follows the all- important sub-section 7 of Section 16A which says:- Whenever there is dispute with respect to the management of an institution, persons found by the Regional Deputy Director of Education upon such enquiry as it deemed fit to be in actual control of its affairs may, for purposes of this Act, be recognized to constitute the Committee of Management of such institution until a court of competent jurisdiction directs otherwise: Provided that the Regional Deputy Director of Education shall before making an order under this sub section, afford reasonable opportunity to the rival claimants to make representations in writing. [4] … [5] The Societies Registration Act, on the other hand, deals, inter alia with the resolution of disputes with respect to the election of the office bearers of a registered society. The power of the Registrar or the prescribed authority to determine disputes in respect of the election of the office bearers of the society, as distinct from the managing committee of the institution run by that society, operates in an altogether different field from that with which the Regional Dy. Director is concerned. The two enactments, namely, the Intermediate Education Act and the Societies Registration Act, to our mind, operate in distinct fields. There is no overlapping between the two. Even if there is, insofar as disputes pertaining to the management of a recognized institution or the constitution of the Committee of Management are concerned, the Dy. Director of Education enjoys, in view of the scheme of the Act and the non-obstante clause used in Section 16A(1) and the clear provisions of Section 16A(1) exclusive powers save to the extent that the decision of the Dy. Director of Education under sub-section (7) shall operate only till a court of competent jurisdiction directs otherwise.” (emphasis supplied) 20. The Government Order dated 21.11.2008 could not have overriden the statutory provisions. The Government Order itself does not amend and could not have amended any existing Scheme of Administration. Director of Education under sub-section (7) shall operate only till a court of competent jurisdiction directs otherwise.” (emphasis supplied) 20. The Government Order dated 21.11.2008 could not have overriden the statutory provisions. The Government Order itself does not amend and could not have amended any existing Scheme of Administration. In light of the Government Order dated 21.11.2008, the Director could have proposed to any institution to amend the Scheme of Administration after giving the existing Committee of Management an opportunity to represent against the proposed amendments and then further, the Director or any other competent authority could have approved the existing Scheme of Administration either in its unamended form or with the proposed amendments (in this case, the amendments proposed in the Government Order dated 21.11.2008) but till the Scheme of Administration is so amended, the provisions of the Government Order dated 21.11.2008 could not have been implemented in the institutions where the Scheme of Administration has not been amended incorporating the clause provided in the Government Order. 21. The outcome of the aforesaid discussion is that elections to a Committee of Management of an institution and its office-bearers are to be held in accordance with the Scheme of Administration. Any transgression from the scheme prescribed in the Scheme of Administration would invalidate the elections and any elections held according to the provisions of the Scheme of Administration cannot be rejected by the DIOS or the Regional Level Committee on the ground that the elections were not in accordance with the Government Order dated 21.11.2008. Under Section 16-A(7) of the Act, 1921, the educational authorities – the District Inspector of Schools, the Regional Level Committee, the Joint Director or any other authority – can only look into the question as to whether the elections set up by the concerned party was in accordance with the Scheme of Administration. The educational authorities while deciding any dispute regarding rival claims set up by the parties under Section 16-A(7) cannot go beyond the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. The educational authorities while deciding any dispute regarding rival claims set up by the parties under Section 16-A(7) cannot go beyond the provisions of the Scheme of Administration. Resultantly, where the Scheme of Administration of the institution stipulates a general body of the institution separate and different from the general body of the parent society, i.e., the society which runs the institution, and the general body of the society is not the electoral College for electing the Committee of Management and the office bearers of the institution, the elections cannot be invalidated on the ground that the elections were held on a list which was not registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. 22. In the present case, the Scheme of Administration of the College was approved by the Regional Joint Director of Education, Agra. It is not the case of the respondents that any action was taken or any notice was issued to the College by the Director under Section 16-B or Section 16-CCC to include in the Scheme of Administration of the College the provisions of the Government Order dated 21.11.2008. The provisions stipulated in the Government Order dated 21.11.2008 were not incorporated in the Scheme of Administration of the College. There is nothing on record in the present case to show that any proposal was made by the Director or any other authority asking the College to amend its Scheme of Administration in accordance with the provisions stipulated in the Government Order dated 21.11.2008. 23. The Scheme of Administration of the College provides for a general body of the College separate and different from the general body of the Society. There is no provision either in the Scheme of Administration of the College or in the bye-laws of the Society providing that members of the general body of the Society shall automatically also be members of the general body of the College or that the general body of the Society shall also be the general body of the College. The Scheme of Administration of the College provides that any person desirous of being member of the general body of the College shall deposit the requisite fees, either by cheque or bank draft issued in the name of the College, along with an application recommended by any member of the general body of the College and submit the application before the Treasurer of the College. The application shall be placed before the Manager who shall in turn place the same before the Committee of Management and in case, the Committee of Management refuses to enroll the said person as member of the College, the matter shall be placed before the general body of the College. Clause -5 of the Scheme of Administration provides that if the general body of the College agrees to admit the applicant as member, the applicant shall be admitted as member with effect from the date the cheque or the bank draft was submitted by him. A reading of Clause -5 of the Scheme of Administration shows that it is the general body of the College which has the authority to decide on the admission of any applicant as a member of the general body of the College and the society – its general body or its governing body – has no role in the matter. The Scheme of Administration of the College also provides that the Executive Committee of the College shall be constituted by elections from amongst members of the general body of the College and the elections shall be held by the general body of the College. The Scheme does not stipulate participation of the general body of the Society in the elections of the Committee of Management or its office-bearers. Clause -26 of the Scheme of Administration also provides that any order passed by the Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits shall not be applicable either on the general body of the College or on the Executive Committee of the College. In short, the general body of the Society is not the electoral College which elects the Committee of Management and the office bearers of the College. Thus, the elections of the Committee of Management and the office bearers of the College cannot be rejected on the ground that the elections were held, on a list of members which was not registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. Any order rejecting the elections on the ground that the election was held on a list not registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 would be vitiated because of consideration of irrelevant material. Any order rejecting the elections on the ground that the election was held on a list not registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 would be vitiated because of consideration of irrelevant material. As a corollary, any election held on a list registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 and excludes members of the general body of the College who were not members of the general body of the Society would be contrary to the Scheme of Administration and invalid. 24. In view of the aforesaid, the elections of the Committee of Management of the College set up by the petitioners and by respondent no. 4 and referred to the Regional Level Committee by the DIOS vide his order dated 15.12.2021 could not have been rejected on the ground that the elections were held on a list of members which had not been registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. The decision / order dated 29.3.2022 passed by the Regional Level Committee rejecting the elections set up by the petitioners as well as the respondent no. 4 on the aforesaid ground is contrary to law. The consequential order dated 30.3.2022 passed by the Joint Director of Education appointing an Authorized Controller in the College is, for the same reason also contrary to law. The appointment of Authorized Controller in the College has been declared illegal. It has also been held that the elections of the Committee of Management and the office bearers of the College could not have been held on a list registered under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860 and such an election would be invalid because it would be contrary to the Scheme of Administration. For the said reasons, the elections dated 10.9.2023 were invalid and contrary to law. 25. Thus, the order dated 14.9.2023 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh recognizing the elections dated 10.9.2023 electing the respondent no. 4 as Manager of the Committee of Management of the Institution is also contrary to law. 26. For the aforesaid reasons, the orders dated 29.3.2022, 30.3.2022 and 14.9.2023 are contrary to law and are, hereby, quashed. 27. The matter is remanded back to the Regional Level Committee, Aligarh Region, Aligarh, i.e., respondent no. 2 to decide the dispute regarding the rival elections set up by the petitioners and respondent no. 26. For the aforesaid reasons, the orders dated 29.3.2022, 30.3.2022 and 14.9.2023 are contrary to law and are, hereby, quashed. 27. The matter is remanded back to the Regional Level Committee, Aligarh Region, Aligarh, i.e., respondent no. 2 to decide the dispute regarding the rival elections set up by the petitioners and respondent no. 4 and referred to it by the District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh by his letter dated 15.12.2021 afresh in accordance with the observations made above. Appropriate orders shall be passed by the Regional Level Committee and by the District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh within a period of two months from today and the Regional Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Region, Aligarh shall ensure that appropriate orders are passed by the Regional Level Committee and the District Inspector of Schools within the time prescribed by this Court. 28. Till the decision of the Regional Level Committee, the College shall be managed by an Authorized Controller appointed by the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Region, Aligarh. 29. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ petitions are allowed. 30. A copy of this order shall be sent to the Joint Director of Education, Aligarh Region, Aligarh by the Registrar (Compliance) within ten days for necessary compliance.