Allahabad High Court
Committee Of Management Sri Ramanuj ... vs State Of U.P. And 6 Others on 30 May, 2022
Author: Ajit Kumar
Bench: Ajit Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 35 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5821 of 2022 Petitioner :- Committee Of Management Sri Ramanuj Sanskrit Mahavidyala And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 6 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sankalp Narain,Akhilesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhishek Srivastava,Avneesh Tripathi,Kripa Shankar Shukla,Tanu Roopanwal,Vinay Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Compliance affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution, petitioner has assailed the order passed by the Joint Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi dated 05.02.2022 whereby he has superseded the committee of management of the institution in purported exercise of power under Section 6(3) of the U.P. Payment of Salaries (High School & Intermediate Teachers & Employees) Act, 1971 (in short 'the Act, 1971').
Submission is that the recommendations upon which the Regional Joint Director of Education seems to have acted upon in passing the order was in relation to the payment of salary of a teacher namely Vijay Kumar Sharma and the retirement dues of another teacher namely Ayodhya Tripathi. While initially this case was argued before this Court, it was contended that the matter of Vijay Kumar Sharma attained finality as the decision of the Vice Chancellor in favour of Vijay Kumar Sharma has come to be reversed by the Chancellor by passing order under Section 68 of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (in short 'the Act, 1973') and in so far as retirement dues of the late Ayodhya Tripathi was concerned, the bills were already forwarded and, therefore, it was now open for the District Inspector of Schools to have passed the necessary orders being Drawing and Disbursing Officer.
The Court while passing order dated 28.03.2022 also took prima facie view that since it is a degree college affiliated to the University, the committee of management of the Society registered under the Societies and Registration Act, 1860 (in short 'the Act, 1860'), governed the management of the degree college. Learned Standing Counsel was granted time to have instruction in the matter.
On 16.05.2022, the matter was taken up again. The plea was taken by learned Standing Counsel that the District Inspector of Schools had a difficulty in finalising the payments of Mr. Ayodhya Tripathi as the service book was required though it was pleaded before this Court on behalf of the Manager that the service book had already been forwarded to the District Inspector of Schools on 16.04.2022 by registered post.
Today, a compliance affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.6 namely the District Inspector of Schools in which vide 11, it has been stated that since the Vice Chancellor had not recognised the impugned committee of management constituted as per the bye-laws then there could be a difficulty in clearing the salary bills of teachers and employees of the institution.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted before this Court that the list of office bearers of that committee of management has come to be registered by the Assistant Registrar, Societies, Varanasi on 30.12.2019.
Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and their arguments raised across the bar, two things emerge in this matter which requires consideration: (a) The right of education authorities in directing for single hand operation of accounts on one hand and then supercession of committee of management on the plea that there was a difficulty in payment of salary of the teachers and employees to invoke provisions under Section 6(3) of the Act, 1971; and (b) Whether a Society which also functions as a committee of management in a degree college affiliated to the University, which has come to be registered by the Assistant Registrar, Societies under the Act, 1860, what powers have the respondents-education authorities to hold that there would be difficulty in making disbursement or salary and other emoluments to the employees and teachers of such institutions.
In so far as point (a) is concerned, from the affidavits that have been filed before this Court, the plea taken earlier which has come to be recorded in the my order dated 28.03.2022, I find that controversy with regard to Mr. Vijay Kumar Sharma is no more surviving and the order of Chancellor has attained finality and so, therefore, this ground is no more available to the education authorities to invoke the provisions of Section 6(3) of the Act, 1971.
In so far as second leg of first point as to the dues of Mr. Ayodhya Tripathi, is concerned, the District Inspector of Schools does not dispute that the papers including service records have been transmitted to his office and, therefore, it will be now his duty to clear all dues and I do not find the management of the institution in any way to be coming in between the payment of dues to Mr. Ayodhya Tripathi and the power of the District Inspector of Schools to clear the dues. So this ground is also no more available to the education authorities.
Now coming to the second point as to the power to be exercised under Section 6(3) of the Act, 1971 on the plea that there would be difficulty in disbursing salary to the teachers and employees on the ground that new committee has yet not been approved by the Vice Chancellor, I find that such an issue has already attained finality in the detailed judgment of this Court in the case of Committee of Management, Raja Tej Singh Vidyalaya, Aurandh, District Mainpuri & anr vs. District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri & ors, reported in (2000) 2 UPLBEC 993 and the law laid down in that judgment still holds the field.
The committee of management of the Society that runs an educational institution is elected under the Scheme of bye-laws and so even if it has completed its term in office, it would not become functus officio. The law applicable to institution is recognised under the Intermediate Education Act, 1921 will not apply here where institution is affiliated to University.
In Raj Tej Singh Vidyalaya (supra) vide paragraph nos.18 & 19, it was held thus:
"18. A society may run educational institutions at different levels namely Primary, Basic, Intermediate, degree level. A society running an educational institutional has to conform to the Societies Registration Act as well as the Act dealing with that level of education. The intermediate Education Act deals with intermediate Institutions whereas UP Basic Education Act and UP State University Act deal with Basic and Degree level institutions. The provisions of these Acts are different resulting into different consequences. I have considered differences between an Intermediate College and a degree college in another case and have held13 that position of a committee of management of an Intermediate College is different than the position of a committee of management of a degree college. The position of a committee of management running a Basic school is similar to the position of a committee of management running a degree college; same principles apply. Law in respect of committee of management an Intermediate College does not apply to a committee of management of a Basic school. In brief, reasons are as follows.
19. 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 that society: Whereas if that society is also running an intermediate college then it should have a separate scheme of administration for the Intermediate college. This 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 school. 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; one office bearers; and election is governed by the rules of that society under the Societies Registration Act. In such a case decision of the authorities under the Societies Registration Act will prevail over the educational 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 election disputes. "
I find the case in hand to be on a much better footing because the committee of management has already come to be approved and consequently the list of office bearers have also come to be registered on 30.12.2019 under Section 4(1) of the Act, 1860. The term is admittedly 5 years. Merely because the Vice Chancellor of the University has remained inactive, or has been involved in only doing conversations and correspondences with the committee of management for documents and other details pertaining to election, it will not amount to disapproval of a committee of management, to invoke the provisions under Section 6(3) of the Act, 1971.
In my considered view, therefore, this above ground is not available to the education authorities to invoke the provisions of Section 6(3) of the Act, 1971. However, I would observe that the Vice Chancellor should not linger on the matter and it would be in the fitness of the things that he expedites the matter of recognition and recognises the newly registered committee of management of the institution at the earliest and in any case within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.
In view of the above, therefore, I am not able to sustain the order passed by the Regional Joint Director of Education dated 05.02.2022. Accordingly, this writ petition succeeds and the order dated 05.02.2022 is hereby quashed.
The petitioner's committee of management will be permitted to function as Manager of the institution accordingly.
Writ petition thus stands allowed in above terms.
Order Date :- 30.5.2022 P Kesari