Allahabad High Court
C/M, Makkhan Lal Inter College And ... vs State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Deptt Of ... on 24 August, 2012
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?AFR
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2064 of 2012
Petitioner :- C/M, Makkhan Lal Inter College And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Deptt Of Sec. Education And Ors
Petitioner Counsel :- A.P. Tewari,S.S. Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the impugned order dated 25.10.2011 whereby the District Inspector of Schools, Kanshi Ram Nagar has directed the Management of the institution that no meeting of the Committee of Management should be held without the prior permission of the District Inspector of Schools and further challenge has been raised to the direction issued to the Principal to get an F.I.R. lodged in relation to any irregularity found pertaining to the land of the institution.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the orders are patently without jurisdiction inasmuch as there is no Provision either under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 or under the Scheme of Administration applicable to the institution whereby the D.I.O.S. can impose such conditions. This writ petition was entertained and the following interim order was passed on 12.01.2012:-
"Learned Standing Counsel had been granted 4 weeks time to file counter affidavit. 2 weeks thereafter for rejoinder affidavit. List thereafter."
Thereafter the matter was adjourned. In spite of repeated time having been granted, no counter affidavit has been filed till now.
In the aforesaid situation, this Court does not find out it necessary to keep the matter pending. The respondents 5 to 7 have not put in appearance nor have filed any counter affidavit or opposed the petition.
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the impugned orders dated 25.10.2011 and 05.12.2011, there is no justification for directing the Committee of Management not to hold any meetings or to hold it with the approval or prior permission of the District Inspector of Schools. The order dated 25.10.2011, therefore being without authority in law deserves to be set aside.
So far as the direction to the Principal to lodge an F.I.R. is concerned, it appears that this was done, as some alleged enquiry had been initiated at the level of the District Magistrate. In the opinion of the Court, the District Magistrate under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 has no authority to undertake any such exercise in so far as the property of an educational institution is concerned, unless such an authority is available under the Revenue Law of the Land. In the opinion of the Court, the District Inspector of Schools even otherwise can not be conferred with any such Authority by the District Magistrate. So far as any irregularity in relation to the land of an institution is concerned the same can be subject matter of enquiry only under the U.P. Educational Institution Prevention of Dissipation of Property Act, 1974.
The impugned orders therefore do not conform to the provision of law and the writ petition deserves to be allowed. The Order dated 25.10.2011 and 05.12.2011 are quashed, subject to the observations made hereinabove. The allowing of the present writ petition does not prevent the respective authorities to Act, in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 24.8.2012
N Tiwari
