Allahabad High Court
Committee Of Management, A.V. Inter ... vs District Inspector Of Schools, ... on 30 March, 1994
Equivalent citations: AIR1995ALL38, (1994)3UPLBEC1592, AIR 1995 ALLAHABAD 38, 1995 ALL. L. J. 221, 1994 (1) ALL CJ 624, 1994 ALL CJ 1 624, 1994 (3) ALL WC 1609, 1994 (3) UPLBEC 1541
Author: G.P. Mathur
Bench: G.P. Mathur
ORDER G.P. Mathur, J.
1. The dispute raised in these six Special Appeals is inter-connected and therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order after hearing learned counsel for the parties at the admission stage.
2. Writ Petition No. 19516 of 1991 has been filed by (1) Committee of Management A. V. Inter College (hereinafter referred to as the Institution) Shamsabad district, Farrukhabad through its Manager Mohd. Fazil Khan and (2) Mohd. Fazil Khan against (1) District Inspector of Schools (hereinafter referred to as the DIGS), Farrukhabad and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan praying that the attestation of signature of respondent No. 2 made by the respondent No. 1 on 5-7-1991 may be quashed and the- respondents may be restrained from interfering with the functioning of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 as the Committee of Management and Manager respectively of the Institution. The writ petition was allowed by learned single Judge on 24-9-1993 and the order dated 5-7-1991 was quashed and it was further directed that petitioner No. 2 shall continue to function as Manager of the" Committee of Management of the Institution till fresh election is held or till some alternate arrangement is made under the Scheme of Administration by the Dy. Director of Education (hereinafter referred to as DDE) concerned. Special Appeal No. 681 has been filed by (1) Committee of Management of the institution through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan against the aforesaid order.
3. Writ Petition No. 27995 of 1991 has been filed by (1) Committee of Managemnt of the institution through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan against (1) DIGS (2) S.K. Singh, Officiating DIGS and (3) Mohd. Fazil Khan for quashing the order dated 26-9-1991 by which the signature of respondent No. 3 had been attested by respondent No. 1 on the basis of Stay order dated 19-7-1991 passed by High Court in Writ Petition No. 19516/91. The writ petition was dismissed on 24-9-1993 Special Appeal No. 685 of 1993 has been filed against this judgment order of the learned single Judge by (1) Committee of Management through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan impleading the DIGS, Officiating DIGS, Account Officer and Mohd. Fazil Khan as respondents Nos. 1 to 4 respectively.
4. Writ Petition No. 28307 of 1993 has been filed by (1) Committee of Management of the institution through its Manager Rajendra Singh Gangwar and (2) Rajendra Singh Gangwar against (1) D.D. E. (2) DIGS (3) Accounts Officer and (4) Abdul Aziz Khan for quashing of the attestation of signature of respondent No. 4 by the order dated 19-5-1993 and for a direction commanding the respondents not to interfere in the functioning and Management of the institution. The writ petition was allowed by the judgment and order dated 27-9-1993 and the impugned order dated 19-5-1993 was quashed and the DIOS was directed to refer the proceedings of the elections held on 5-4-1993 and 20-4-1993 to the D.D.E. for decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 16A(7) of U.P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Special Appeal No. 688/93 has been filed against the aforesaid judgment and order of the learned single Judge by (1) Committee of Management of the insititution through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan impleading D.D.E., DIOS, Accounts Officer, the Committee of Management of the institution through its Manager Rajendra Singh Gangwar and Rajendra Singh Gangwar as respondents Nos. 1 to 5.
5. Writ Petition No. 23574 of 1993 has been filed by (1) Committee of Management of the Institution and (2) Rajendra Singh Gangwar against (I) D.D.E. (2) DIOS. and (3) Abdul Aziz Khan for a writ of mandamus to the DIOS to refer the matter to the D.D.E. under Section 16A(7) of the Act. The writ petition was dismissed as not pressed on 27-9-1993 in view of the judgment given in W.P. No. 28307/93 and it was further directed that until a decision is taken by the D. D. E. as per the orders passed in W.P. No. 28307/93, the Management of the Institution will be carried on as per the orders passed in W.P. No. 19516/91. Special Appeal No. 687/93 has been filed against the aforesaid judgment and order of the learned single Judge by (1) Committee of Management of the Institution through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan impleading the D.D.E. DIOS, alleged Committee of Management of the institution and Rajendra Singh Gangwar as respondents.
6. Writ Petition No. 3068 of 1993 has been filed by (1) Committee of Management through its Manager Mohd. Fazil Khan and (2) Mohd. Fazil Khan against (1) DIOS (2) Accounts Officer and (3) Abdui Aziz Khan for quashing of the order dated 21-1-1993 by which the signature of respondent No. 13 was attested by respondent No, 1 and for commanding the respondents not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner as Management of the Institution. The writ petition was allowed by the judgment and order dated 24-3-1993 and the impugned order dated 21-1-1993 was quashed and the respondents were restrained from interfering with the functioning of respondent No. 2 as Manager of the Institution. Special Appeal No. 686/93 has been filed against the aforesaid judgment and order of the learned single Judge by (1) Committee of Management of the institution through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan impleading the DIOS, Accountants Officer, Mohd. Fazil Khan and the alleged Manager of the Institution as respondents.
7. Writ Petition No. 8585/93 has been filed by Ram Murti Gangwar, Principal of the institution against (1) DIOS (2) Associate DIOS, (3) Accounts Officer, (4) Committee of Management and (5) Abdul Aziz Khan for quashing the orders of suspension dated 4-3-1993 passed by respondent No. 5 and order dated 6-3-1993 passed by respondent No. 1 approving the aforesaid suspension order. The writ petition was allowed by the judgment and order dated 4-12-1993 and the orders dated 4-3-1993 and 4-5-1993 (Annex-ure-3 to the counter affidavit filed to the Amendment Application) were quashed. Special Appeal No. 704 of 1993 has been filed against the aforesaid judgment and order of the learned single Judge by (1) Committee of Management through its Manager Abdul Aziz Khan and (2) Abdul Aziz Khan impleading DIGS, Associate D1OS, Accounts Officer and Ram Murti Gangwar as respondents.
8. The case of the petitioner in Writ Petition. No. 19516/91 is that the election of the Committee of Management was held on 22-4-1991 in which Ahmed Abbas, Mohd. Fazil Khan and Abdul Aziz Khan were elected as President, Manager and Dy. Manager respectively, that the signature of Mohd. Fazil Khan was attested by the DIOS on 24-4-1991; that ten members of the Committee of Management including Ahmed Abbas and Abdul Aziz Khan were removed from the membership of the society and also of the Committee of Management in the meeting held on 19-2-1991 and intimation thereof was given to the DIGS on 11-3-1991; that the DIGS by order dated 5-7-1991 attested the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan as Manager; that the aforesaid attestation of signature had been done without issuing notice or affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; and that as Abdul Aziz Khan had been removed from the membership of the general body, the attestation of his signature was invalid and illegal. The case of Abdul Aziz Khan respondent No. 2 was that there is no society in the name and style of "Anglo Vernacular Inter College (A.V. Inter College)" nor the college is run by the said society; that A.V. Inter College, Shamsabad, Farrukhabad was registered under the Societies Registration Act in the year 1949 and its name continued till 1981 but the said society lapsed due to non renewal by the Assistant Registrar; that by the order dated 21-12-1981 a society in the name of "Anglo Vernacular Inter College, Shamsabad" was registered; that in 1983 a fresh society was constituted under the name of "Shamsabad School Committee, Shamsabad district, Farrukhabad"; that the Asstt. Registrar by order dated 23-2-1991 had renewed the said society for period of five years, that Mohd. Fazil Khan submitted an application on 21-2-1991 to the Asstt. Registrar for renewal of the society and in the said application, he had wrongly deleted the names of the members and had wrongly included the names of ten outsiders who were not members of the society, that the respondent No. 2 after coming to know about the aforesaid committee by respondent No. 2 filed several applications before the Asstt. Registrar that it is true that the election of the Committee of Management was held on 22-4-1991 in which those persons were elected as alleged in the petition, that in a meeting held on 28-6-1991 the Committee of Management had removed Mohd. Fazil Khan from the office of Manager and had elected Abdul Aziz Khan in his place; that the DIGS was informed about the proceedings of the meeting held on 28-6-1991 who after issuing notice approved the aforesaid resolution by his order dated 5-7-1991 and also attested the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan as Manager, that neither any meeting was held on 19-2-1991 nor any member had been removed on the said date and the proceedings of the aforesaid meeting were forged and fictitious and that no information of the resolution dated 19-2-1991 had been sent to the DIOS.
9. In Writ Petition No. 28307 of 1993 case of the petitioners is that in the election held on 22-4-1991 Abbas Ahmed Mohd. Fazil Khan and Abdul Aziz Khan were elected as President, Manager and Dy. Manager respectively; that ten members including Ahmed Abbas and Abdul Aziz were removed in the meeting of the general body held on 19-2-1991; that the DIOS attested the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan on 5-7-1991 which was challenged in writ petition No. 19516/91 and an interim order was passed in the aforesaid writ petition on 19-7-1991 whereby the respondents were restrained from interfering with the functioning of the petitioners-committee of management; that in compliance with the aforesaid interim order; signature of Mohd. Fazil Khan was again attested on 26-9-91; that Abdul Aziz Khan filed writ petition No. 27995/91 challenging the aforesaid order dated 26-9-91 wherein an interim order was passed on 3-10-91 restraining the respondents from functioning as Manager of the institution; that the interim order dated 19-7-91 and 3-10-91 passed by the High Court were wholly contradictory to each other; that in these circumstances Shri Ram Murti Gangwar, Principal of the institution filed a writ petition for payment of salary and in the aforesaid writ petition an interim order was passed on 1-11-91 directing the DIGS to pay salary to the staff of the institution by single operation; that the Asstt. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits passed an order in favour of Abdul Aziz Khan which was challenged by the petitioners by filing writ petition No. 27994/91 in which an interim order was passed on 30-9-91 staying the operation of the order dated 20-9-91; that thereafter Abdul Aziz Khan filed writ petition No. 3626/91 praying that the respondents may be directed to attest the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan as Manager of the Institution in which no interim order was passed; that however, on 21-1-93 the DIOS recognised Abdul Aziz Khan as Manager of the institution on the basis of stay order dated 3-10-91 passed in Writ Petition No. 27955/91 and the opinion given by learned Standing Counsel for the State of U. P.; that the aforesaid order was challenged by the committee of management headed by Mohd. Fazil Khan by filing writ petition No. 3068/ 93 in which an interim order was passed on 3-2-93 directing the DIGS to operate salary accounts of the college till 15-2-93; that fresh election of the general body was held on 5-4-93 in which Mohd. Fazil Khan was elected as President and Rajendra Singh Gangawar as Manager; that the intimation of the result of the election was sent to the DIGS on 10-4-94 but the DIGS did not pass any order; that the petitioners then filed writ petition No. 23754/ 93 for a direction to the D.D.E. to decide the management dispute under Section 16-A(7) of the Act, in which a counter-affidavit was filed by Abdul Aziz Khan and it contained an order dated 19-5-93 attesting his signature; that the counter-affidavit showed that Abdul Aziz Khan claimed that the election was held on 20-4-93 in which Sayed Ahmed Abbas was elected as President and Abdul Aziz Khan as Manager and that the petitioners were in effective control over the affairs of the institution. A counter-affidavit has been filed by Abdul Aziz Khan and his case is that Rajendra Singh Gangwar nor any other office bearer of the alleged committee of management of the institution are in fact members of the society which runs the college; that there is no registered society under the name of "Anglo Vernacular Inter College, Shamsa-bad"; that Mohd. Fazil Khan was, removed in the meeting held on 28-6-91 and Abdul Aziz Khan was elected in his place and the DIGS attested his signature on 5-7-91; that it is incorrect that any meeting was held on 19-2-91; that Mohd. Fazil Khan submitted a false application on 21-9-91 before the Asstt. Registrar wrongly showing that ten members of the society had been removed; that Mohd. Fazil Khan had obtained a fradulent and illegal certificate of renewal in his favour from the Asstt. Registrar; that Ahmed Abbas had filed writ petition No. 22716/91 against the order of Asstt. Registrar which was decided on 19-7-91 and in pursuance of this order, the Asstt. Registrar passed an order on 20-9-91 holding that the election of Abdul Aziz Khan was valid and set aside the order of renewal dated 23-2-91 in favour of Mohd. Fazil Khan; that Mohd. Fazil Khan challenged the aforesaid order of Asstt. Registrar by filing writ petition No. 27994/91 and the operation of the order dated 20-9-91 was stayed; that the society under the name and style of 'A. V. Inter College' had lapsed; that againsl the order dated 21-1-93 by which signature of respondent No. 4 was attested by the DIGS, Mohd. Fazil Khan had filed writ petition No. 3068/93; that the stay order dated 3-10-91 was passed by the High Court in supersession of the order dated 19-7-91; that Mohd. Fazil Khan is a criminal and history sheeter; that Ram Murti; Gangwar in collusion with Rajendra Singh Ganwar had filed writ petition for payment of salary to the teachers; that Mohd. Fazil Khan never remained in effective control of the institution after his removal on 28-6-91; that it is wrong that any meeting of the general body was held on 4-5-1993 or any election had taken place on that date and the correct fact is that fresh election was held on 20-4-93 in which Sayed Ahmed Abbas was elected as President and Abdul Aziz Khan was elected as Manager; that writ petition No. 23574 of 1993 was superfluous as the course open for the petitioner was to make an application in the earlier writ petition; that the respondent No. 4 and the committee of management is in actual control of the institution.
10. The facts mentioned above would show that there is a serious dispute between the parties and both sides are making every possible effort to gain control of the institution. According to the Committee of which Mohd. Fazil Khan is Manager ten members including Ahmed Abbas and Abdul Aziz Khan were removed from the membership of the general body in a meeting held on 19-2-91 and as such the latter had no claim to be elected as Manager. On the other hand, according to Abdul Aziz Khan, there is no society under the name and style of "Anglo Vernacular Inter College" nor the College is run by the said society and that initially the society known as A. V. Inter College, Sham-sadbad district, Farrukhabad was registered in 1949 which continued till 1981 but had lapsed thereafter and a society known as "Anglo Vernacular Inter College" was registered on 21-12-81. It is also claimed that a fresh society was constituted under the name of "Shamsabad School Committee, Shamsabad district, Farrukhabad" in 1981. Thus there is dispute with regard to the existence and entity of the society itself, the members whereof have to elect a committee of management for administering the institution. There is also dispute between the parties regarding the date on which the elections were held in the year 1993. According to Abdul Aziz Khan election was held on 20-4-93 in which he was elected as Manager. While according to rival party, elections were held on 5-4-93 in which Rajendra Singh Gangwar was elected as Manager. The narration of facts shows that large number of writ petitions have been filed by one party or the other challenging the orders passed by the Assistant Registrar and also the orders passed by the DIGS whereby signatures were attested recognising particular person as Manager for day today working of the institution. In Writ Petition No. 28307/93 and 23574/93, learned single Judge has issued a direction to the DIGS to refer the proceedings of the elections allegedly hold on 5-4-93 and 20-4-93 to the D.D.E. for decision in accordance with the provisions of Section 16-A(7) of the Act. Section 16-A(7) reads as follows;
"Wherever there is dispute with respect to the Management of an institution persons found by the Regional Deputy Director of Education upon such enquiry as is deemed fit to be in actual control of its affair may, for purposes of this Act, be recognised to constitute the Committee of Management of such institution until a Court of competent jurisdiction direct 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.
Explanation:-- In determining the question as to who is in actual control of the affairs of the institution, the Regional Deputy Director of Education shall have regard to the control over the funds of the institution and over the administration, the receipt of income from its properties, the Scheme of Administration, approved under sub-section (5) and other relevant circumstances."
While expressing the scope of the aforesaid provision, a Division Bench of this Court in Sankatha Prasad Srivastava v. Dy. Director of Education, 1985 UPLBEC 751 : (1985 All LJ 1289) has held as follows (at p. 1294 of All LJ);
"While examining the question of effective control the question as to who were elected as office-bearers certainly has relevance but its examination is only incidental in the sense that the Deputy Director of Education cannot act as a substitute for the Civil Court for determining the validity or otherwise of the election but can find out as to who was prima facie entitled to be in effective control. The rationale of this enquiry is obvious because the law does not contemplate a rank outsider to meddle with the management of the institution. Whether one party or the other was the validly elected committee in accordance with law is a question for ultimate decision by the appropriate Civil Court. The Deputy Director of Education is to examine this aspect only in a summary manner."
It is, therefore, clear that the enquiry before Deputy Director of Education is limited one and is confined to determine as to who is in control of the affairs of the institution. The Deputy Director of Education cannot determine the validity or otherwise of the election. That apart, the Deputy Director has to conduct this enquiry in a summary manner. The decision of the Deputy Director of Education, as provided by the Act itself, is subject to the decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction.
11. On the facts of the present case, we are clearly of the opinion that the controversy between the parties cannot properly be resolved in a summary enquiry by the Deputy Director of Education under Section 16-A(7) of the Act. The Dy. Director of Education cannot take oral evidence which will be necessary for effectively deciding the dispute. The differences between the parties are such that go to the every existence of the society itself. In these circumstances, the entire controversy can only be resolved in a Suit by the Civil Court.
12. The facts narrated above also show that initially signature of Mohd. Fazil Khan were attested as Manager by the DIGS on 24-4-90 on the basis of the election held on 22-4-90. Thereafter, the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan were attested as Manager by the DIGS on 5-7-1991 on the basis of resolution of the committee of management said to have been passed on 28-6-91. This order of the DIGS dated 5-7-91 was challenged in Writ Petition No. 19516/91 in which stay order was passed on 19-7-91. On the basis of this stay order, signature of Modh. Fazil Khan was again attested on 26-9-91. This order dated 26-9-91 was challenged by Abdul Aziz Khan by filing writ petition No. 27995/91 in which a stay order was passed on 3-10-91. The interim orders of this Court dated 19-7-91 passed in W.P. No. 19516/91 and the order dated 3-10-91 passed in W.P. No. 27995/91 were wholly contradictory to each other and could not be reconciled in any manner. Again in the year 1993, both sides claimed to have held election but on two different dates. While Rajendra Singh Gangwar claimed to have held election on 5-4-93, Abdul Aziz Khan claimed, to have held election on 20-4-93 on the strength of the attestation of his signature by the DIGS on 5-7-91. The DIGS attested the signature of Abdul Aziz Khan on 19-5-93. This shows that the DIGS has passed several orders sometimes recognising Mohd. Fazil Khan or Rajendra Singh Gangwar of one party as Manager and sometimes recognising Abdul Aziz Khan of the rival party as the-Manager. Naturally during this period, one or the other party may have operated the accounts of the institution and would have tried to gain control over the funds and would have performed some administrative functions. There being utter confusion on account of various orders passed by the DIGS on different dates, it will be really difficult for the Dy. Director of Education to determine as to who is in actual control of the affairs of the institution.
13. The material on record shows that the parties are never satisfied with the decision of the Education Authorities and the party against whom the order is passed, immediately rushes to this Court. We have before us six writ petitions and the record of W.P. No. 3068/93 gives reference to these writ petitions, two of which have been filed by the parties and one by the Principal of the institution and that takes the number to nine. We do not know how many more petitions have been filed in this regard. If the dispute is decided by the Dy. Director of Education under Section 16-A(7) of the Act, we can safely presume that the aggrieved party would again rush to this Court and challenge his order. Thus the decision by Dy. Director of Education would not only be a summary one but would also not finally determine the dispute so as to conclude the controversy once for all. Looking to the past history of the litigation between the parties, proper course appears to be that the entire management dispute may be decided by the Civil Court in a properly constituted suit.
14. Special Appeal No. 704/93 arises out of Writ Petition No. 8585/93 wherein ihe Principal Ram Murti Gangwar had sought quashing of the order of suspension dated 4-3-93 passed by Abdul Aziz Khan in his capacity as Manager and also the approval order of the DIGS. Since, we are relegating the parties to f he Civil Court for deciding the dispute regarding management, the order of suspension passed by Abdul Aziz Khan can-, not be allowed to stand.
15. An institution exists for imparting education to the students studying there and it is their interest which is supreme. The right of any person to manage the institution cannot override the interest of the large body of students studying there. Frequent dispute regarding management always affects the smooth and orderly administration of the institution. The facts of the present case also show that on account of the management, dispute the teachers and other employees were not getting salary and therefore, they had to file a writ petition in this Court wherein a direction was issued to the DIGS to pay salary by single operation. An unpaid teacher can hardly discharge his duties properly. Section 16-D(3)(iii) gives powers to the State Government to appoint an Authorised Controller where dispute with respect to the right claimed by different persons to be lawful office bearers of the committee of management is affecting smooth and orderly administration of the institution concerned.
16. In the result, the various orders passed by the DIGS in all the six writ petitions are quashed. The parties are directed to get their right of management decided by the Civil Court. We further direct that till the decision of the controversy by Civil Court, none of the parties shall function as committee of management of the institution. We further appoint the District Magistrate, Far-
rukhabad to act as Authorised Controller of the institution who shall perform all the duties and functions of the committee of manage-ment of the institution as laid down in U. P. Intermediate Education Act, U. P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 or in any other enactment in this regard. It will be open to the District Magistrate, Farrukhabad to appoint any other Sub-Divisional Magistrate in his place to perform the duties and functions of the Authorised-Controller. The suspension order passed against the Principal Ram Murti Gangwar is quashed. It will be open to the Authorised Controller to pass fresh order of suspension against him, if the facts and circumstances justify such action and in accordance with law. All the special appeals are disposed of in the manner indicated above.
17. Order accordingly.