Allahabad High Court
Padmakar Tripathi vs Deputy Director Of Education, Vth ... on 16 July, 2004
Equivalent citations: 2005(1)AWC653
Author: Arun Tandon
Bench: Arun Tandon
JUDGMENT Arun Tandon, J.
1. This judgment will cover Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 3501 of 1989, Brahmadeo Tripathi v. Deputy Director of Education, Varanasi and Anr. ; 3002 of 1991, Padmakar Tripathi v. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Vth Region, Varanasi and Anr. ; 12017 of 1992, Padmakar Tripathi v. Regional Deputy Director of Education, Vth Region, Varanasi and Ors. and 14343 of 1992. Padmakar Tripathi v. Director of Education (Madhyamik) Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and Ors..
2. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, senior advocate, assisted by Sri P. N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the Committee of Management headed by Sri Padmakar Tripathi, Sri A. P. Shahi, learned counsel for the Committee of Management headed by Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi and Sri Piyush Shukla, learned standing counsel for the State-respondents.
3. Sri Murlidhar Sanskrit Pathshala, Andar, district Jaunpur is a Sanskrit Degree College affiliated to the Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwa Vidyalaya, Varanasi. It is not in dispute that the provisions of Intermediate Education Act are not applicable to the said institution. The society which runs and manages the said institution has been registered in the same name. The Committee of Management of the society becomes the Committee of Management of the institution, the members and office bearers are elected from amongst General Bodies of the society in accordance with the registered bylaws.
4. A dispute arose between the parties with respect to the office bearers of the society as well as the Committee of Management. The facts relevant for the present writ petition are as follows :
On the basis of election held on 19th March, 1990, Sri Padmakar Tripathi submitted a list of office bearers for the years 1992-93 in the office of the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi. The said list of office bearers was duly registered. Subsequently the another list of office bearers was submitted by Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi on the basis of alleged elections held on 16th March, 1990. The Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Varanasi on 18th July, 1992, passed two orders. By means of the first order the Assistant Registrar cancelled the list of office bearers which was registered on the basis of elections of the Committee of Management headed by Sri Padmakar Tripathi, dated 19th March, 1990. By means of the other order passed on the same date, the Assistant Registrar has referred the rival elections of office bearers under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as amended in the State of Uttar Pradesh for adjudication to the prescribed authority. Both the orders of the Assistant Registrar have been challenged by means of the Writ Petition No. 30271 of 1992, Padmakar Tripathi v. Deputy Director of Education, Vth Regional, Varanasi and Ors., which has been made the leading case.
5. The order dated 18th July, 1992, whereby the Assistant Registrar has cancelled the list of office bearers registered on the basis of election set up by Sri Padmakar Tripathi cannot be sustained in view of the admitted position that the said order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, namely Sri Padmakar Tripathi inasmuch as the said order of the Assistant Registrar, Varanasi visit the petitioner evil civil consequences. It was not open to the Assistant Registrar to cancel the list of office bearers in violation of principle of natural justice, which was earlier registered by his office for the year 1992-93. In such circumstances, the order dated 18th July, 1992, is liable to be set aside. However, since the said order has lost its efficacy inasmuch as the list of office bearers was registered for the year 1992-93 which has expired long back, no orders are being issued in that regard.
6. So far as the second order of Assistant Registrar is concerned whereby the dispute of office bearers has been referred for adjudication to the prescribed authority on the basis of rival elections set up by the parties, has contended on behalf of the petitioner, namely, Sri Padmakar Trtpathi that Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi has never been elected as Manager and he has no right to hold the election of the office bearers of the society. The aforesaid issue has been decided by the Deputy Director of Education by means of the order dated 26th October, 1989, whereby he has held that Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is not even a primary member of the Society. In such circumstances, it was necessary for the Assistant Registrar to afford opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, namely Sri Padmakar Tripathi before deciding to refer the dispute under Section 25 (1) of the Act on the basis of election set up by Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi.
7. It is submitted that the Assistant Registrar is not required to act as a post office and he should have applied his mind to the facts of the case, namely as to whether frivolous dispute is said being set up by Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi in respect to the Committee of Management in support thereof the petitioner has relied upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Committee of Management, Kisan Shiksha Sadan, Banksahi, District Basti and Ors. v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Gorakhpur Region, Gorakhpur and Anr., (1995) 2 UPLBEC 1242, as also upon the single Bench judgment of this Court in CM. Writ Petition No. 22326 of 1996, Committee of Management, Sarvodaya Mandal Raranpur, Allahabad and Ors. v. Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Allahabad and Ors., 1997 ALR 143.
8. In view of the aforesaid, it is submitted that the second order of the Assistant Registrar dated 18th July, 1992 is also liable to be set aside
9. It is contended on behalf of Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi that the order of the Deputy Director of Education is already under challenge by means of the Writ Petition No. 3501 of 1989, which is to be taken up for consideration by this Court today itself.
10. It is submitted that the order of the Deputy Director of Education to the effect that Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is not even a primary member of the general body and without jurisdiction inasmuch as the Deputy Director of Education has no authority to decide the said issue.
11. Writ Petition Nos. 14343 of 1997, 3002 of 1991 and 12017 of 1992 have been filed against the consequential orders passed by the authorities in pursuance of the order of the Deputy Director of Education, which is subject-matter of challenge in the Writ Petition No. 3501 of 1989. The decision of the said writ petitions shall as such depend upon the order to be passed in Writ Petition No. 3501 of 1989.
12. There is a serious dispute between the parties on the issue as to whether Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is a primary member of the general body or not and further with regard to the validity and legality of the rival elections set up by the parties, which necessarily requires the findings in respect of disputed question of facts.
13. In the opinion of Court such exercise can be undertaken by the prescribed authority as contemplated by the provision of Section 25 (1) of the Act as amended in the State of Uttar Pradesh and as referred by the Assistant Registrar and order dated 18th July, 1992. Even if the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, Sri Padmakar Tripathi is not accepted that Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is not even a primary member of the general body of the society and, therefore, he has yet no right to hold the elections of the office bearers, the elections held by Padmakar Tripathi at least requires adjudication by the prescribed authority with regard to their legality under the provisions of Section 25 (1) of the Act.
14. In such circumstances, no purpose would be served by adjudicating upon the Issue as to whether in the facts of the case the dispute as referred by the Assistant Registrar vide order dated 18th July, 1992, was justified or not on the ground that no opportunity of hearing was offered to the petitioner.
15. In the opinion of the Court, the prescribed authority should decide the issue with regard to the rival elections set up by the parties referred to by him vide order of the Assistant Registrar dated 18th July, 1992 and while deciding the aforesaid reference Assistant Registrar shall record specific findings on the material evidences, which shall be produced by the parties amongst other on the following issues :
(1) who are valid member of the general body of the society including the question as to whether Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is valid member or not?
(2) who has a right to convene a meeting for the purpose of holding the election?
(3) elections set up by the parties, have been held strictly in accordance with the provisions of bye-laws or not.
16. The aforesaid exercise may be undertaken by the prescribed authority within four months from the date a certified copy of this order is filed before him. The prescribed authority shall offer opportunity of hearing to the parties and shall also permit them to lead such evidences as may be necessary.
17. The question as to whether the findings recorded by the Deputy Director of Education vide orders dated 24th January, 1989 and 26th October, 1989, to the effect that Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi is valid member of the general body or not, cannot bind the prescribed authority. In that regard reliance has been placed on behalf of Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi upon the Judgment of this Court in Committee of Management, Raja Tej Singh Vidyalaya, Aurandh, District Mainpuri and Anr. v. District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri and Ors., (2000) 2 UPLBEC 993, wherein this Court has held as follows :
"A society is governed by the Society Registration Act. Its Committee of Management is elected and is governed by the Societies Registration Act and the rules of the society. Whereas if that society is also running an intermediate college then it should have a separate scheme of administration for the intermediate college. The scheme of administration has to conform to the Intermediate Education Act. A Committee of Management of an intermediate college is elected and is governed by the Intermediate Education Act and the scheme of administration of that college. Often there are two different bodies having different elections under different provisions of law. On the other hand this is not so in a society running a basic schools. In such a society there is one Committee of Management, which governs the society as well as the basic school. There is only one election of one office bearers ; and elections is governed by the rules of the society under the Societies Registration Act. In such a case decision of the authorities under the Societies Registration Act will prevail over the education authorities :
The Committee of Management of a basic school and the society running it are the same ;
The elections of the Committee of Management are held under rules of that society and the Societies Registration Act ; The prescribed authority under the Society Registration Act has been specifically empowered to decide the election disputes.
18. The aforesaid judgment has been applied in the judgment of this Court in Committee of Management, A. K. College, Shikohabad, District Firozabad and Anr. v. State of U. P. and Ors., (2000) 1 UPLBEC 777.
19. In view of the aforesaid legal position since the question with regard to Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi being a primary member of the general body or not is being referred for adjudication to the prescribed authority. The Writ Petition No. 3501 of 1989 filed by Sri Brahmdeo Tripathi against the order of the Deputy Director of Education is rendered infructuous and no purpose would be served by deciding the same on merits. The other writ petitions, which only challenge the consequential orders passed by the authorities in pursuance of order of Deputy Director of Education dated 24th January, 1989, are also rendered infructuous.
20. In such circumstances, the prescribed authority shall not be influenced in any manner by the observations made in the orders passed earlier which were under challenge before this Court in abovementioned writ petition. Till the decision of the aforesaid dispute, the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the management of society and the institution.
21. With the observations, referred to above, all the writ petitions being Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 3002 of 1991, 30271 of 1992, 14343 of 1992 and 12017 of 1992 are finally disposed of.