Patna High Court
Bihar Rajya Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, ... vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 6 December, 2016
Author: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Bench: Ajay Kumar Tripathi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9841 of 2016
===========================================================
1. Bihar Rajya Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Patna through its President (Pradhan), Sri
Ganga Prasad, having its registered office at Sri Munishwaranand Bhawan, Naya
Tola, P.S.- Kadamkuan, Town & District- Patna.
2. Ganga Prasad, S/o Late Munder Sah, resident of Arya Bhawan, Khajpura, Baily
Road, P.S.- Shashtri Nagar, Town & District-Patna.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Education Department, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna.
2. The Director (Secondary Education), Education Department, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna.
3. The District Education Officer, Patna.
.... .... Respondent/s
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P. K. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Rajeev Lochan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. GP8- Manish Kumar
For the Private-respondent : Mr. Y. V. Giri, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate
===========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 06-12-2016 Heard learned counsels for the parties extensively.
No organization, however, pious in its objective, is free of internal squabble and fight to gain control over the affairs of the organization by one person or the other. Most of these battles are fought from within, whenever ambition overtakes an individual over the larger interest of such organization. The Arya Pratinidhi Sabha is no exception.
From the pleadings emerging from the writ Patna High Court CWJC No.9841 of 2016 dt.06-12-2016 2/5 application, the parent body, known as Sarvadeshik Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, New Delhi, a registered society, is the nodal body. A fight started within the organization and like an amoeba, it has disintegrated into three bodies. The three sets of people are claiming supremacy and control over such body. If the nodal body is divided, you can't expect the branches to be free of such fight down the organization, because the disintegrated nodal body also encourages factionalism in the various branches and units across the country, if not globally. In turn the institutions down below become a victim.
The fight of parent body was taken to Delhi High Court and the Court has appointed commissioners to look into the issues and resolve. The Court is informed that it has not culminated into a final decision or declaration.
Taking cue from what is going on in Delhi, the fight begins in the State of Bihar as well, since this organization has very diverse kind of interest, especially in the area of education and welfare. Properties are diverse and wide, if not lucrative as well. There are people with hungry eyes, who would like to corner the benefits in one manner or the other. The Court, therefore, is concerned not with what is going on for the fight of supremacy, between the factions, but the immediate fall out of such fights. In the present case educational institutions, namely, Arya Kanya Uchha Patna High Court CWJC No.9841 of 2016 dt.06-12-2016 3/5 Madhyami Vidyalaya, Naya Tola and Dayanand Kanya Uccha Vidyalaya, Mithapur are suffering.
To prevent ugly situation, the Kadam Kuan Police Station locked up certain premises, details of which is evident from the order, dated 06.05.2010, passed in Title Suit No. 7 of 2007 by Sub-Judge-VI, Patna, copy of which is Annexure - 2. In between, there were some writ applications also filed, but they are limited in nature.
Problem has arisen in the smooth running of the educational institutions, because disbursement of salary etc. of the institutions have been affected and since the funding and financing is also done substantially by the State of Bihar, therefore, the dispute was also brought to the notice of the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna. The order, dated 17th of February, 2016, contained in Annexure-11 was issued. This order is to be read in the context and background under which it has been issued. Merely because one party or the other over-reacts, it does not mean that the Court will also got carried away by such vociferous kind of submission. The effort of the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna was to ensure smooth running of the institutions and what the Director has done by way of Annexure - 11 was to only certify the position, which was indicated in the order of the Sub- Patna High Court CWJC No.9841 of 2016 dt.06-12-2016 4/5 Judge, contained in Annexure-2. Let it be clarified for all and for record that this in no way is a declaration in favour of "A" or "B". This is a temporary arrangement keeping the institutions in mind. Since the Director, Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, Patna is not a Civil Court or Court of competent jurisdiction, therefore, Annexure - 11 cannot be used by any authority or any fractions to declare themselves to be the winner. The legal battle still has to carry on. The Court is informed that the suit was dismissed for default, but a restoration application has been filed. The outcome of the order in the restoration application will decide the fate of the case, but since the fractions at war have correlation even with the parent body, they will also have to hold their horses till a declaration comes from the Delhi High Court with regard to the parent body.
The writ was filed because Annexure - 11 was withdrawn by another notification, dated 10.06.2016 (Annexure - 12). By virtue of this order, contained in Annexure-12, Annexure - 11 has been withdrawn.
So far as essence of Annexure - 12 is concerned, since it does not give any details as to why it had to be issued, therefore, this order does become vulnerable and subject to challenge, because it does affect some working arrangement, which had been made by the previous Director, Patna High Court CWJC No.9841 of 2016 dt.06-12-2016 5/5 Secondary Education, Government of Bihar and some kind of a right was created in favour of the working arrangement based on a judicial order. The non-speaking order, which Annexure - 12, is, therefore, cannot be sustained. Annexure - 12 is quashed. The State authorities are given freedom to take a fresh decision in accordance with law Writ application is allowed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) SKM/-
AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R. CAV DATE Uploading Date 08.12.2016 Transmission Date