Allahabad High Court
C/M Kisan Upkarak Inter College ... vs State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others on 16 April, 2012
Bench: V.K. Shukla
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18640 of 2012
Petitioner :- C/M Kisan Upkarak Inter College And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Secy. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Prabhakar Awasthi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,J.P.Singh
AND
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 18666 of 2012
Petitioner :- Tej Pal Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Jayant Prakash Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,J.P. Singh
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J.
The present writ petition and CM WP No. 18666 of 2012: Tej Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others are taken up together and are being disposed of the finally by this common judgement as they arise out of the same cause of action.
In both the petitions, one filed by Somvir Singh and another Tej Pal Singh, the order impugned is an decision dated 16.3.2012, taken by the Regional Level Committee (in short, the RLC), wherein the claim of Kripal Singh has been accepted and the claim of Somvir Singh has been turned down.
The petitioners in CM WP No. 18640 of 2012 has come up with the case that the elections have been held on 3.1.2010, wherein Ganga Prasad was elected as manager and he as Assistant Manager. However, after his death, a casual vacancy arose which was filled up by him as the manager and by Somvir Singh being elected in his place and the papers had been transmitted to the District Inspector of Schools (in short, DIOS).
The group headed by Kripal Singh has also come up with a similar case that elections have been held on 3.1.2010 and, thereafter, in the casual vacancy, which occurred on the death of the manager, he, by virtue of being the assistant manager, has been elected as the manager and his papers have also been submitted.
Tejpal Singh has rushed to this Court contending therein that none of the elections till date had been approved and, in view of this, none of the claims should have been accepted and an authorised controller should have been appointed for holding the elections.
The matter had been taken up by the RLC after the papers had been transmitted to the DIOS. Thereafter, Somvir Singh appeared and presented his claim. Similarly, Kripal Singh has also appeared and presented his claim. The DIOS, Bhim Nagar, submitted his comments in respect of the papers which had been transmitted to the DIOS and, thereafter, it is reflected, the RLC has taken the decision in question.
The decision taken by the RLC in the present case cannot be approved for the simple reason that the X-rox copy of the order, filed at page 86 of the paper--book, shows that the DIOS, Moradabad, has not at all signed the proceedings and, coupled with this, the Joint Director of Education and the Dy. Director of Education are one and the same incumbent and at both places his signatures have been appended. The RLC has to comprise of the Joint Director of Education, Deputy Director of Education as well as DIOS; and, as such, on the face of it, the constitution of the RLC has not at all been on the parameters of the Government Order dated 19.12.2000. When the decision was to be taken by the RLC, then, accordingly, the decision of one or two officers cannot be approved.
Coupled with this, in the present case, the elections of Kripal Singh has been accepted and that of Somvir Singh has been non-suited. The RLC at no point of time has ever proceeded to consider the matter objectively, i.e. at no point of time the RLC proceeded to consider (1) as to who were entitled to convene the meeting and hold the elections; (2) whether the persons who have participated in the elections had a right to participate in the elections and the proceedings, and (3) the proceedings have been carried out strictly on the parameters of the scheme of administration.
In the present case, no such exercise, as mentioned above, has been taken while proceeding to accord the approval to the election of Kripal Singh.
In view of the above, the order dated 16.3.2012 is not at all being approved of. The said order is quashed and set aside. Both the writ petitions are allowed and the Director of Education (Secondary), U.P., Lucknow, is directed to see that the RLC is properly constituted at Moradabad and thereafter the RLC is directed to decide the matter afresh, after affording an opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties and only that group of persons should be authorised to run and manager the institution in whose favour the finding of entitlement thereto is arrived at.
In case, it is find out that none of the elections can be recognised, then the Joint Director of Education (Secondary), U.P., Lucknow, is permitted to appoint a prabandh sanchalak who shall proceed to hold the elections on the basis of the validly determined electoral college by the RLC.
The entire exercise has to be carried out expeditiously, preferably, within a period of 4 months.
Order Date :- 16.4.2012
sks-grade iv
