Allahabad High Court
Ashram And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 7 Others on 22 December, 2023
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:243071 Reserved on 11.07.2023 Delivered on 22.12.2023 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 8277 of 2023 Petitioner :- Asharam And 4 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Suchita Tripathi,Naresh Chandra Tripahti Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Prabhakar Awasthi Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Naresh Chandra Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for respondent nos.5 to 7 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of State-respondents.
2. The present petition has been preferred seeking the following relief:-
"(i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 27.01.2023 (Annexure No.1), order dated 12.08.2021 (Annexure No.2) passed by respondent no.2 and 4 respectively and also to quash the order dated 14.07.2021 (Annexure No.3) and to quash the consequential election dated 09.08.2021 of committee of management of the College.
(ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondent no.3 and 4 not to give effect to the impugned order dated 27.01.2023 and 12.08.2021 passed by respondent no.2 and 4 respectively with further order to appoint Prabandh Sanchalak to manage the affairs of the College till fresh election."
3. It is the case of petitioners that earlier in year 2016, there was a dispute regarding General Body of the College, however, finally total 72 life members were found to be only valid members per order dated 12.01.2017 passed by the then Prabandh Sanchalak, out of aforesaid 72 life members, the previous election of Management held on 24.01.2017 and the petitioner no. 1 namely Asharam was elected to the office of Manager and Shri Ranveer Singh, the respondent no. 8 was elected for the office of President. The signatures of the Asharam- the petitioner no. 1, were attested by the then District Inspector of Schools on 12.06.2017. In a meeting dated 24.12.2017, Committee of Management decided to enroll new life members of the General Body and accordingly the agenda was issued. Undisputedly a meeting dated 20.04.2018 took place and a resolution was passed by Committee of Management granting membership to 174 life members as per provisions of Clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration of the College. The minutes of the resolution of the aforesaid meeting dated 20.04.2018 were prepared alongwith the names of new enrolled life members. Petitioner nos. 2 to 5 were thus, granted the membership as the bank draft deposited by them were encashed in the bank account of the College and the receipts of the deposit of the bank draft of Rs.1000/- each were also issued to the petitioner nos. 2 to 5 and in fact all the new members enrolled in the meeting dated 20.04.2018 were issued the receipts of the deposit of the respective bank drafts and the money of each member was encashed and the said money is still with the College in its bank account, thus, the total members of General Body of the College became 246 as 72 life members are the old members and the 174 are the new life members. The names of petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are at serial number 107, 94, 126, and 99 respectively in the list of 174 life members.
4. After 3 months about from 20.04.2018, respondent no. 8 namely Ranveer Singh raised dispute regarding grant of membership by filing a complaint dated 16.07.2018 before the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, who was having no jurisdiction in the matter particularly as there was no election of Committee of Management was due, however, in turn to that an enquiry officer was appointed and an enquiry report dated 12.10.2018 was submitted before the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, who did not thereafter, passed any order on that report. After submission of aforesaid report dated 12.10.2018, respondent no. 8, Ranveer Singh again illegally filed a complaint dated 22.10.2018 before District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, who again appointed another inquiry officer per letter dated 25.10.2018 to enquire again the dispute of membership which was again a frivolous and illegal exercise by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut and thus, another inquiry report was submitted by a person namely Yograj Singh, who is having no relation in the matter of dispute of membership and neither there exists any power and jurisdiction for doing such inquiry. In this second report it was incorrectly stated that only 55 persons were granted the membership.
5. District Inspector of Schools, Meerut thereafter issued a letter dated 12.02.2019 illegally stating that the list of 55 members is to be accepted as valid list, being aggrieved by the illegal order and arbitrary action taken by the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, with regard to the grant of membership, certain new life members out of 174 persons filed the Writ Petition No. 6633 of 2020 (Dharampal and 5 others versus State of U.P. and others) challenging the aforesaid order dated 12.10.2018 of District Inspector of Schools and the inquiry report dated 15.01.2019 and this Court vide order dated 28.02.2020 held that interference by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, is not warranted in the matter of decision finalizing the list of members of the general body of the College and it was left open to be decided by competent authority without being influenced by any orders passed by District Inspector of Schools. Respondent no. 8 and his associates illegally tried to oust the petitioner no. 1 from the office of Manager and on the basis of false and fabricated documents and contrary to the procedure provided for no confidence motion was passed against petitioner no. 1 which was approved by the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut by order dated 25.05.2019 and the petitioner no. 1 being aggrieved against the said action filed writ petition No. 22021 of 2019 in which interim order was granted staying the order dated 25.05.2019 and consequent to that the signature of petitioner no. 1 were again attested for the office of Manager vide order dated 01.08.2019 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut and petitioner no.1 continued for his whole term as Manager of the College.
6. Since no new election was held after the election dated 24.01.2017 and term was expired and the Joint Director of Education failed to appoint a Prabandh Sanchalak of the College, Writ Petition (C) No. 11610 of 2020 (Rajendra Singh and others versus State of U.P. and others) was filed before this Court and the same was finally disposed of by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.08.2020 and the then Joint Director of Education, Meerut, coming to the knowledge of the order dated 06.08.2020 of this Court, passed an order dated 25.08.2020, whereby he appointed the Prabandh Sanchalak of the College to the Principal of Pandit Deen Dayal Rajkiya Model Inter College, Kharkhaunda, Meerut, namely Shri Sunil Kumar Bhadana. He was also the observer appointed in earlier election held on 24.01.2017 and was near and dear of respondent no. 8 Ranveer Singh thereafter, the aforesaid prabandh sanchalak namely Sunil Kumar Badhana illegally proceeded to finalize the list of members of the General Body of the persons to the choice of respondent no. 8 and the petitioner no. 1- ex-Manager, therefore, submitted his complaint/letter on 06.02.2021 along with the copy of resolution of meeting dated 24.12.2018, resolution dated 20.04.2018 along-with the true photocopy of receipts of membership.
7. The then Prabandh Sanchalak hurriedly and in a very arbitrary manner issued an incorrect and illegal list of 127 members, that is 72 old members and 55 new members incorrectly and illegally suggested by respondent no. 8, issued an election program by publication in daily news paper 'Dainik Jagran' on 12.03.2021 with the information that the list of 127 members have been pasted on the notice board of the College. From perusal of the news of news paper dated 12.03.2021 and also from the list pasted in the notice board of the college, it is clinching clear that the list submitted by the petitioner no. 1 and the dispute of grant of membership to 174 persons was totally out of consideration by then Prabandh Sanchalak in finalizing the valid list of members of General Body of the College. Prabandh Sanchalak namely Sunil Kumar Bhadana issued another notice to petitioner no. 3, 4 and to respondent no. 8 and also to two other persons to place their statement and objection on 20.03.2021 in the Government Modern Inter College, Kharkaunda. In pursuance of the same, petitioner no. 4 Sudhir Kumar filed letter on 25.03.2021 on behalf of all petitioners, stating that his letter dated 20.03.2021 was made available to him on 25.03.2021 and the time to see the papers was fixed for 25.03.2021 at Government Inter College Kharkaunda, but, papers submitted by other disputants was not supplied to them. After perusing the papers on 25.03.2021, the objection/statement was filed by the petitioners on 27.03.2021 before the then Prabandh Sanchalak of the College. The petitioner no. 1 also filed his separate objection/statements on 27.03.2021 before the then Prabandh Sanchalak. Thereafter no hearing was done by the then Prabandh Sanchalak and the impugned order 14.07.2021 was illegally and arbitrarily passed, holding the valid list of 122 members vide order/letter dated 15.03.2021 (5 members were dead in meantime). The aforesaid order dated 14.07.2021 was illegally passed in violation of principle of natural justice as no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioners or to any members, whose memberships were illegally cancelled.
8. The then Prabandh Sanchalak/Management before deciding the final list of membership illegally and deliberately not published the list of 174 members already submitted on 06.02.2021 by petitioner no. 1 and the list of only 55 was published seeking objection and the same was held to be a list of valid members as was illegally earlier said to be valid list by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut which was negated by Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2020 passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 6633 of 2020 and as such, the impugned order dated 14.07.2021 is illegally passed to the great prejudice of petitioners on the alleged premise of provision of clause 7 read with clause 17 (5) of Scheme of Administration while the aforesaid provisions was illegally construed and interpreted by the then Prabandh Sanchalak to give the illegal favour to ex-president- respondent no. 8 by holding only 127 members (72 old + 55 new members).
9. By reading the provision of clause 7 and clause 17(3) read with clause 17(5) of Scheme of administration, it is very much clear that the view taken by the Prabandh Sanchalak that the treasurer is only the competent office bearer to receive the bank draft is misconceived and incorrect as the manager has each and every power to receive the application alongwith draft from the person seeking membership and after being grant of membership by resolution passed by Committee of Management, the drafts are to be collected by treasurer for submission before president for depositing the same in the bank, thus the view taken by the Prabandh Sanchalak in passing the impugned order is wholly illegal and unsustainable in law and order passed dated 14.07.2021 is liable to be set aside.
10. Respondent no. 8 with the illegal aid of the then treasurer illegally and fraudulently fabricated a list of 55 names of persons in which names of 39 persons only are common in the list of 174 life members and name of 16 persons were illegally inserted who are rank trespasser and there is no resolution passed by Committee of Management of the aforesaid 16 persons in which the name of respondent no. 6 and 7 are also there and thus, the respondent no. 6 and 7 are rank trespasser. List of 55 members was a fabricated list and as many as 16 names are of such persons who are rank trespasser and their name is not included in the list of 174 persons. It is also stated that there is no resolution of committee of management for granting the membership to those 16 members as their name are not included in the list of 174 persons for which the resolution was passed on 20.04.2018. The names of 16 persons are Suman wife of Anant Pal, Anuj son of Ananmt Pal, Sandhya wife of Anuj, Kanwar Pal son of Satpal Singh, Sandeep Kumar son of Rajendra, Praveen son of Rajvir Singh, Banarsi Das son of Samay Singh, Jogendra Singh son of Samay Singh, Samrat son of Anand Pal, Anil son of Ranvir Singh, Kuldeep son of Vijendra Singh, Ranvir Singh son of Samehar, Sunil son of Ranvir Singh, Mithilesh son of Mukesh, Rahul Kumar son of Anil Singh and Manish son of Omveer Singh. The name of these persons are shown at serial no. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 13, 19, 20, 21, 26, 35, 48, 49 and at 53 respectively in the fabricated list of 55 members and by inserting these persons the persons shown at serial no. 8, 7, 10, 11, 54, 167, 33, 32, 9, 169, 50, 48, 16, 168, 39, 36 and 35 are ousted out of list of 174 members. Thereafter, the then management/prabandh sanchalak issued the election program on 22.07.2021 published on 23.07.2021 in Hindustan Daily news paper for holding the election out of 122 members only (as 5 old members died) ignoring the right of 135 members duly and validly enrolled as life members of the General Body of the College while in the list of 122 members there are 16 persons who are rank trespasser including the respondent no. 6 and 7 that is Samrat and Brajmohan who are said to be elected for the office of Manager and President respectively of the Committee.
11. Petitioners filed their objections again on 30.07.2021 before the then Prabandh Sanchalak against the illegal on-going alleged election. The registered letter was also sent on 30.07.2021 sending their objection to Prabandh Sanchalak. The petitioners have also requested District Inspector of Schools, by submitting their letter dated 22.07.2021 to restrain the Prabandh Sanchalak in holding illegal election and also not to recognize any result of such election. Petitioners also made their objections before the respondent no. 3- Joint Director of Education with the prayer to restrain the on-going election and to cancel the illegal list out of which election was going on but all the representation/request made by petitioners before respondent no: 3 and 4 remained unattended, causing great prejudice to the petitioners, in spite of serious and very relevant issues having been raised before District Inspector of Schools, Meerut against holding illegal election in as much as incorrect and illegal list of the General Body of the College, the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut illegally and arbitrarily passed an order dated 12.08.2021 approving the election dated 09.08.2021.
12. Petitioners being aggrieved with the illegal action of then Prabandh Sanchalak and also against the aforesaid election dated 09.08.2021, they filed the Writ Petition (C) No. 19882 of 2021 on 04.08.2021 before this Court however, since an order approving election dated 09.08.2021 was passed in the meantime on 12.08.2021 by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, the said writ petition was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh with a view to challenge the aforesaid order dated 12.08.2021 also. Thereafter the Writ petition No. 21111 of 2021 (Sachin Kumar and 5 others Vs. State of U.P. and 6 others) was filed by petitioners and the aforesaid petition was finally disposed of on 28.09.2021 by Coordinate Bench of this Court with direction to Joint Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut to pass the order deciding the objection raised by the petitioners. Thereafter, petitioners in the Writ Petition (C) No. 21111 of 2021 submitted the certified copy of the order dated 28.09.2021 along-with the representation/letter dated 11.10.2021 with the request to Joint Director of Education to hear the matter as directed by the this Court and to cancel the order dated 12.08.2021 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut and also to cancel the election dated 09.08.2021 as well as the list of 122 members, illegally finalized by the then Prabandh Sanchalak vide his order dated 14.07.2021 whereupon the Joint Director of Education issued a notice dated 21.10.2021 to the petitioners as well as to respondent no. 6 and 8.
13. On notice, petitioners submitted their representation dated 12.11.2021, wherein date was fixed by Joint Director of Education since, no hearing took place, petitioners again filed their representation dated 27.12.2021, thereafter, reply dated 10.01.2022 to the representation of respondent- Ranvir Singh and Samrat was filed before the Joint Director of Education by the petitioners. The aforesaid reply is already in record as the same is mentioned in the impugned order. Joint Director of Education has earlier heard the matter but he was not finalizing the matter and was sitting over the matter to give favour to respondent no. 5 to 7, being aggrieved with the same, petitioners filed a Contempt Application (Civil) No. 5763 of 2022 against Shri Onkaar Shukla- the Joint Director of Education, Meerut, who was still holding that post, whereupon Coordinate Bench of this Court passed an order dated 26.09.2022 in the aforesaid Contempt Application by which two months further time was granted to the opposite party (Shri Onkaar Shukla) who was holding the post of Joint Director of Education- the respondent no. 3. When the Joint Director of Education came to the knowledge on 14.10.2022 about the aforesaid order dated 26.09.2022 passed in aforesaid Contempt Application by this Court, on 21.10.2022, the Joint Director of Education issued the notice to the parties by fixing the date of 04.11.2022 to appear before him and to submit the written statement. On 04.11.2022 nothing was done by the respondent no. 3 and the next date of 17.11.2022 was fixed and again on 09.12.2022 was fixed which is evident from the impugned order dated 27.01.2023 itself and till date the Regional Committee was not even in picture in the on-going proceeding to hear the matter in question of this writ petition.
14. On 27.01.2023, impugned order has been passed by Regional Committee headed by Joint Director of Education while the direction by this Court vide order dated 28.09.2021 passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 21111 of 2021 was to the Joint Director of Education to decide the matter, as Regional Level Committee was ceased to have power in view of the fact that District Inspector of Schools, Meerut already attested the signature of Samrat-respondent no. 6 as Manager of respondent no. 5 and in this situation, only jurisdiction was to the higher authority i.e. Joint Director of Education to look into the validity of the order passed by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut on 12.08.2021. This view has already been held by the Division Bench of this Court and the said reported case was already mentioned in the judgment dated 28.09.2021 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 21111 of 2021.
15. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that impugned order dated 27.01.2023 passed by Regional Committee- the respondent no. 2 is not only without jurisdiction and illegal but is also contrary to the teeth of the order dated 28.09.2021 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 2111l of 2021 and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set aside which is also contrary and contemptuous to the aforesaid order dated 28.09.2021. He further submitted that the impugned order which is illegally passed by Regional Level Committee in which District Inspector of Schools, Meerut is also one of the member is now is in fact in a position to review his earlier order dated 12.08.2021 which he does not possess and therefore, the order dated 28.09.2021 was passed by this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 21111 of 2021 whereby only the Joint Director of Education, Meerut Region, Meerut being the higher officer has been directed to adjudicate the matter as to whether the order dated 12.08.2021 is a valid order? However, the impugned order dated 27.01.2023 has been illegally passed by Regional Level Committee- the respondent no. 2 which was ceased to his power in view of the earlier order dated 12.08.2021 already passed by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut. hence the impugned order dated 27.01.2023 is liable to be set aside on this ground alone.
16. Learned Counsel for petitioner also submitted that list of membership was held to be illegal on the ground that the respective bank drafts of persons applied for membership were made from one account of a bank while there is no such provision in the Scheme of Administration particularly clause 7 and as such the view taken by the respondents holding the membership of persons named in petitioners' list is wholly arbitrary and unwarranted in law, and as such, holding illegal/cancelling the membership of 119 persons including petitioners is also liable to be set aside.
17. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioners also submitted that the names of the following persons belong to the list of 55 members and the said list is said to be valid while the bank draft of following 9 persons are not made from their own bank accounts but the same is made from the account of different persons, the details of which are given here as under:-
Sl. No. Names and Particulars Bank Draft No. Name of Account Holder
1.
Suman W/o Anangpal 546235 Anangpal
2. Anuj S/o Anangpal 546234 Anangpal
3. Sankhya w/o Anuj 546237 Anangpal
4. Kawarpal Satpal Singh S/o Satpal Singh 546238 Anangpal
5. Samrat S/o Anangpal 546236 Anangpal
6. Prandveer S/o Rammehar 717722 Anangpal
7. Amit Kumar S/o Satyapal Singh 339615 From Account No. 85662200015016
8. Sanjeev S/o Rajpal Singh 339616 From Account No. 85662200015016
9. Seenue S/o Jagmohan 77179 Sonu
18. From perusal of the aforesaid fact it is clinching clear that the ground taken to hold the membership of persons of petitioners' list to be illegal on the ground that the bank draft concerned is made from the bank account of another person's bank account is also the same but that ground has not been considered in holding the list of 55 members to be valid list, thus the view taken by respondents in deciding the validity of the membership in two different lists is not on same criteria but is different and discriminatory and thus, the validity of membership of 119 persons is also liable to be held to be valid and thus, total valid members are liable to be 246. From the aforesaid fact, it is clear that not only the bank draft of petitioners' list are prepared from the money of bank account of another person but the similar bank drafts were also prepared of the persons whose names are placed out of the list of 55 members and their membership has been held to be valid but on the same ground, the membership of 119 persons placed in the petitioners' list of 174 persons has been held to be invalid, thus, the act of respondents in deciding the membership is totally incorrect, arbitrary and discriminatory.
19. In the meeting dated 20.04.2018 as many as 174 bank drafts of 174 different persons were accepted by the then Committee of Management and all the same were placed before the meeting and the resolution dated 20.04.2018 was passed and all the persons total being 174 were granted the membership by Committee of Management and all those bank drafts of total being 174 were deposited in the bank account no. 219310001611 of Canara Bank of the Management of the College and all bank drafts were encashed/liquidated and for more than 3 months, no objection was raised. Thus, in grant of membership to 174 persons, the provisions of Clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration of the College were fully complied with but the respondents illegally held the grant of membership to 119 persons to be not valid and the persons being 55 are to be valid while the grant of membership to 55 persons, the resolution is the same, meeting is the same and the procedure adopted is also the same as it is provided under Clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration. List of 55 members is separately prepared by the then Treasurer which was also got signed by the then President- the respondent no. 8 but the said list was not signed by all those office bearers and members of Committee of Management who were present in the meeting dated 20.04.2018 and they all, total being 9, signed and certified the minutes of the meeting but this relevant aspect has not been considered by any of the respondents.
20. For substantiating his arguments, learned counsel for petitioners relied upon the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Sri Yadvesh Inter College and another Vs. State of U.P. and others [2011 (8) ADJ 493 (DB)].
21. Per contra, Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for private respondents vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the petition and rebutted the stands taken up by learned counsel for petitioners by submitting that membership of Suman, Anju, Sankhya, Kawar Pal, Samrat, Prandveer, Amit Kumar, Sanjeev and Sinu would be bad for the reasons that their draft of membership has been prepared from the account of Anangpal and from different account. For this reason, their membership has been assailed in any case, since their membership has been assailed and are said to be not valid members, they should be impleaded as party in view of judgment rendered in the case of Aziz Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Others passed in Special Appeal No. 666 of 2016. He also raised a preliminary objections with regard to maintainability of the writ petition answering deponent would cull out the essential facts which has been mentioned in paragraph nos.54 and 55 of the writ petition that as per petitioners, in all 171 members were enrolled in a meeting which was held on 20.04.2018 and it is only 55 members who have been found to be valid. In essence, petitioners want to assert that 119 members must be included to be part of electoral college. Over and above, the electoral college based upon which elections have been held. Answering deponent would submit that valid election of the Committee of Management has been held on 09.08.2021 and 119 members have been precluded from participating in the said election which is the case of the petitioners and, therefore, it would be asserted that it is 119 members who must approach this Court so as to assert their membership as 119 members have been precluded from participating in the election. Once right personal to the persons excluded from being part of electoral college, there cause of action could not be espoused by any person or persons other than those who have been so precluded, in support of the said submission, he placed reliance upon the judgment passed in the case of C/M Shri Jawahar Inter College Bamnauli 2012 (1) ESC 470.
22. Besides the aforesaid fact, petitioners would invite attention of this Court to Clause 7 of the Scheme of Administration which in no uncertain terms carves out provisions for enrolment of members for which person desirous member, would prepare bank draft in the name of institution which shall be handed over to any of the office bearer/ member and the said office bearer/ member shall hand over the same to the Treasurer. The Treasurer shall send the same to the President who will place the same in the meeting of the Committee of Management. Besides the same, petitioners would also invite attention of this Court to Clause 17 5 (Gha) which in no uncertain terms states that after acceptance of newly enrolled members, the Treasurer shall deposit the membership fee in the account of institution maintained in the bank. In the context of above, petitioners would state that a meeting of the Committee of Management was held on 24.12.2017, wherein, it was decided that new members be enrolled for which the Manager Shri Asha Ram, petitioner may make proper advertisement for enrolment of member and may receive application and draft of Rs.1000/- till 10.04.2018 and thereafter, may place to record in the next meeting of the Committee of Management. A comparison of the meeting which has been annexed as annexure no. 6 to the writ petition in its original form and that which has been herein before would be reflective of the fact that actually 55 applications were in receipt for being enrolled as member and that the Manager of the institution Shri Asha Ram, petitioner informed the office bearers on 20.04.2018 that by fault, he has not brought 19 drafts as he has left at home, therefore, the office bearers believed in him and for this reason the membership was noted down to be 74. Besides the same, internal pages of the said meetings were also removed which would be well reflective from comparison of handwriting. Actually, 55 members were enrolled who gave their applications which has been forwarded by the Treasurer to the President. All 55 drafts were deposited in bank by the Treasurer. In order to avoid bulkiness, petitioner is not bringing on record receipts and submission of drafts by the Treasurer in the bank account.
23. Learned counsel for respondents submitted that on bare perusal of the meeting dated 20.04.2018 which has been brought on record by the petitioners themselves from Serial No.52 to Serial No.84 and from Serial No.89 to Serial No.166 bank drafts have been made from the account of the grandson of petitioner, Manager Asha Ram. A glaring fraud is apparent which has been taken note of by Shri Sunil Kumar, Authorized Controller. This had been a calculated fraud which has been played by the Manager Asha Ram so as to hand over the institution to his grandson Mukul, petitioner no.5.
24. Over and above, it would be submitted that the Manager Asha Ram appears to have obtained application and has done all the forgery on his own signature in complete contravention of Clause 7 read with Clause 17 Gha of the scheme of administration. It is prayed for that petitioner, Asha Ram be called upon to produce the application so as to assess whether any procedure which has been enumerated under Clause 7 and 17 Gha has at all being adopted and that who have submitted the bank draft in the bank. One more fraudulent act would be the bare comparison of receipt which has been annexed hereinbefore issued by the Treasurer to 55 valid members and the receipts as manipulated and fabricated by Asha Ram prepared on 21/22.04.2018 . As an exemplar since, answering deponent could only obtain two receipts is being brought on record for bare comparison of the print of both the receipts.
25. For substantiating his arguments, learned counsel for respondents placed reliance upon the following judgments:-
1. Committee of Management, Aley Ahmad Inter College Amroha and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others [2011 (5) ADJ 195]
2. Committee of Management, Anjuman Hidayatullah Islam High School and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others [2013 (10) ADJ 159]
3. Writ C No. 32058 of 2016, Committee of Management, Shanti Niketan Inter College and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others
4. Committee of Management, Rameshwar Prasad Balika Higher Secondary School Vs. Joint Director of Education, Azamgarh Region, Azamgarh, [2005 (2) UPLBEC 1220]
5. C/M Sri Swami Krishnanad Inter College Bilwar Vs. State of U.P. and others [Special Appeal Defective No.158 of 2020]
6. Committee of Management, Lal Dhar Vidya Mandir Shiksha Samiti Baihrampur Parai Khagal Sirathu, Kaushambi and Another Vs. Prescribed Authority/ U.P. Zila Adhikari, Sirathu, [2011(3) ADJ 801 Kaushambhi and Others].
26. After hearing the rival contentions raised by learned counsel for parties, the epigenes of the matter arises from letter dated 12.12.2019 through which respondent no.4 accepted the membership of 55 members as valid which rises cause of action in favour of other new life members out of 174 persons who preferred Writ Petition No.6633 of 2020 (Dharmpal Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) challenging the order dated 12.10.2018 passed by respondent no.4 and inquiry report dated 15.01.2019 whereupon Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2020 held that interference by respondent no.4 was not warranted in the matter of decision finalizing the list of members of General Body of the College and it was left open to the competent authority without being influenced by any order passed by respondent no.4.
27. When petitioner has been ousted from the office of Manager under the garb of no confidence motion and the same was approved by respondent no.4 vide order dated 25.05.2019 and the same was challenged in Writ Petition No.22021 of 2019, under the strength of interim order granted by this Court, petitioner continued his entire term as Manager.
28. After expiry of term of the Committee of Management, Writ Petition No.11610 of 2020 (Rajendra Singh and others Vs. State of U.P. and others) preferred for seeking direction in the nature of mandamus for appointment of Manager and the same was disposed of vide order dated 06.08.2020, in strict compliance of the same, vide order dated 25.08.2020 issued by respondent no.3, one Mr. Sunil Kumar Bhadana Principal of Pandit Deen Dayal Rajkiya Model Inter College, Kharkhaunda, Meerut was appointed as Manager, since Mr. Sunil Kumar Bhadana being a local person who was earlier appointed as Observer for the election held on 24.01.2017 for Committee of Management of the same institution, was later on changed with the fresh appointment of Principal of Government Inter College, Poothkhaas as Manager vide order dated 11.09.2020, but the fact is not disputed that on the date of superannuation, Joint Director, namely, Mr. O.P. Dwivedi again appointed Mr. Sunil Kumar Bhadana as Manager of the institution without having any reference or direction, thereafter the subsequent appointed Manager of the Committee of Management of the institution initiated in shape of finalizing the valid members of Committee and for convening fresh election but at the same time, direction contained in the order dated 28.02.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.6633 of 2020 was left to be adjudicated by the higher authority than District Inspector of Schools.
29. The final list prepared and published by the appointed Manager for convening fresh election, has been put under challenge by petitioners in Writ Petition No.19882 of 2021, wherein the list of General Body of the College approved by respondent no.4 whereupon the election held on dated 09.08.2021, has been challenged but before filing writ petition the approval order dated 12.08.2021 passed by respondent no.4 was not in the knowledge of petitioners and as such, the same was withdrawn with liberty to file fresh, thereafter Writ Petition No.21111 of 2021 filed by petitioners and the same was disposed of vide order dated 28.09.2021 with direction to Joint Director of Education, Meerut to pass the order deciding the objection raised by petitioners. In the aforesaid writ petition, petitioners challenged the action of subsequent appointed Manager after expiry of term of petitioner as Manager who proceeded without considering the direction passed in Writ Petition No.6633 of 2020 through which the validity of only 55 members has been put under challenge and the grievance of petitioners was supplemented with approving the fresh election held on the basis of same. In spite of the direction passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court wherein direction was issued for Joint Direction of Education to take decision over the objection raised by petitioners, when no action has been taken up by respondent no.3, petitioners preferred Contempt Application (Civil) No.5763 of 2022 specifically against Mrs. Onkaar Shukla, the Joint Director of Education, Meerut, wherein Coordinate Bench of this Court while sitting in contempt jurisdiction, extended two months further time to comply with the order and direction passed on dated 28.09.2021.
30. In compliance of the order dated 26.09.2022 passed in the aforesaid contempt petition, respondent no.3 issued notices to the parties for fixing date of 04.11.2022 to appear before him and to submit their written statements and thereafter fixed some other dates, on dated 27.01.2023, order was passed by Regional Level Committee headed by the Joint Director of Education wherein respondent no.4 himself was one of the members and the order of approval dated 12.08.2021 which was put under challenge, was sanctified by himself while sitting as one of the members of Regional Level Committee. It is also apparent from the records that regarding dispute of election, no reference has been made by respondent no.4 for referring the matter before Regional Level Committee and the direction of Coordinate Bench of this Court along with extended time granted by the Coordinate Bench sitting in the contempt jurisdiction was also extended in favour of particularly respondent no.3 i.e. Joint Direction of Education and at no point of time, there was any direction to the Regional Level Committee for deciding the issue either of membership or action which has been put under challenge taken up by appointed Manager by the respondent no.3. The culmination of election is in chain of subsequent development which happened due to inaction of respondent no.3 which has been initiated way back in the year 2020 itself when membership dispute has been arises because of action taken by one Mr. Sunil Kumar Bhadana, Principal of Pandit Deen Dayal Rajkiya Model Inter College, Kharkhaunda, Meerut who has been appointed as Manager by respondent no.3.
31. Insofar as dispute of membership is concerned, although order dated 28.02.2020 passed in Writ Petition No.6633 of 2020 has been quoted and considered but at the same time, Regional Level Committee failed to examine that the direction was only for the authority higher than the DIOS and the same was not for the Regional Level Committee to decide the issue of declaring only newly inducted members as valid and leaving others from 174 life members as invalid. It is also apparent from the records wherein meeting of the Committee of Management is also referred and examined, there is hardly any description of 16 persons who have been inserted in the list of 55 valid members as held by respondent no.4 leaving others out of 174, once certain newly inducted members who submitted their membership fee from the same account held as valid under which circumstances, certain more members who deposited the membership fee from one account has been held as invalid, the differentia in numbers cannot be taken as a ground for declaration of membership as invalid, the same can be determined on the basis of either only one or if in case more than one, the numbers cannot be taken as a criteria, and as such if the process approved for more than one, the same cannot be determined as invalid for more than other one which may be up to any number.
32. All the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondent has been rendered by Coordinate Benches of this Court except the case of Aley Ahmad Inter College (supra) passed by Division Bench of this Court along with the judgment passed in the case of C/M Sri Swami Krishnanad Inter College Bilwar (supra) through which the judgment rendered by Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 16.03.2022 passed in Writ Petition No.6923 of 2022 has been affirmed and the special appeal preferred by the appellant was dismissed. The ratio of the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondents is broadly on the basis that approval of election once approved by DIOS, but dispute regarding the election can only be adjudicated by Regional Level Committee and after approving the election by DIOS became functus officio.
33. The only judgment relied upon by learned counsel for petitioners passed by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Sri Yadvesh Inter College (supra) which is a subsequent judgment to the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondents wherein it has been held that the elections were recognized by DIOS and the DIOS attested the signatures of Manager and recognized the person to be the Manager he becomes functus officio to refer the matter to Regional Level Committee even if dispute has been raised subsequently, in such a situation, the only remedy available to the aggrieved person is to approach the higher authority which is in the present case undoubtedly is the Regional Joint Director of Education and the Regional Level Committee gets the power to decide the dispute relating to attestation of signatures of Manager including the recognition of the Committee of Management only when the matter is referred by the DIOS and not otherwise and only course open to the aggrieved person is to approach the higher authority.
34. While deciding Writ Petition No.6633 of 2020, Coordinate Bench of this Court was conscious enough while directing the Joint Director of Education, Meerut Division, Meerut to decide the controversy with regard to dispute regarding ousting the certain members out of 174 newly inducted members and along with the inserted 16 new members which were never ever referred in the meeting and thereafter the same direction was issued in Writ C No.21111 of 2021 followed with the extension of time granted in favour of Joint Director who has been arrayed by name in the contempt proceedings initiated by petitioners.
35. Order which impugned the present petition has been passed not by the respondent no.3 but by Regional Level Committee wherein respondent no.4 himself is one of the members for sitting over on his own decision to be for resanctified the same being the higher forum which is not at all permissible in the eye of law.
36. So far as regarding giving credence to the judgment relied upon by learned counsel for petitioners, the same is based upon pronouncement made by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gregory Patrao Vs. Manglore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd. (2022 SCC OnLine SC 830), the ratio of the judgment is a subsequent decision which have considered and distinguished the earlier judgments are binding on High Courts, the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for respondents rendered by Division Bench of this Court while deciding Special Appeal Defective No.158 of 2022 is having no consideration with regard to judgment rendered by the same Bench of this Court passed in the case of Committee of Management, Sri Yadvesh Inter College (supra) and as such, the same is having binding effect over this Court.
37. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, order dated 12.08.2021 passed by respondent no.4, 27.01.2023 passed by respondent no.2 are hereby set aside, in wake of the same, list of members of General Body dated 14.07.2021 and election of Committee of Management held on the basis of same on dated 09.08.2021 are also hereby quashed and set aside. Respondent no.3 is hereby directed to appoint Manager within four weeks from today who will reconsider the matter with regard to newly inducted members of General Body by way of affording opportunity of hearing to all concerned.
38. The abovementioned exercise shall be carried out by the new Manager within three months after his appointment, and thereafter proceed for fresh elections.
39. Writ petition stands allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 22.12.2023 Vivek Kr.
(Saurabh Srivastava, J.)