Allahabad High Court
C/M Bhartiya Uchhatar Madhyamik ... vs Joint Director Of Education And 3 ... on 5 September, 2013
Bench: Arun Tandon
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 23609 of 2013
Petitioner :- C/M Bhartiya Uchhatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya And Another
Respondent :- Joint Director Of Education And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mithilesh Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.C. Chaturvedi,R.K. Ojha,T.K. Srivastava
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
It appears that a copy of the order dated 05.07.2013 has not been forwarded by the office to the Registrar General. Therefore, no further action has been taken for compliance of the said order by the Registrar General.
Let a copy of the order dated 05.07.2013 be forwarded to the Registrar General by the office for necessary compliance of the directions issued therein within three days.
The Registrar General shall submit his compliance report by the next date fixed.
In response to the show cause notice issued by this Court dated 08.05.2013 the respondents (Dr. Dharamveer Singh), he has not filed any response although a counter affidavit has been filed.
Before this Court proceeds any further in the matter, it is appropriate to afford one more opportunity to respondent no. 3 to respond to the show cause as per the order dated 08.05.2013. He may do so by the next date.
The Court has been informed that respondent no. 5 (Anil Kumar) has responded to the show cause notice and has tendered an unconditional apology. The order which was challenged in the writ petition has been recalled in order to establish his bona fide.
The apology tendered by Anil Kumar and the response to be received from respondent no. 3 shall be considered on the next date. Similarly the reply filed by the Joint Director of Education, Km. Ramesh Sharma shall also be considered on the next date.
Heard learned counsel for the parties on the amendment application. It is allowed. Let necessary corrections be made within three days from today.
This Court is surprised to notice that the elections which have been held in terms of the directions issued by this Court from amongst 21 members have not been approved by the Regional Level Committee only because three ordinary members of the Committee of Management have not been elected. In the elections five office bearers and four members of the Committee of Management have been elected. Besides them, there are five nominated members, Principal and two teachers as ex-officio members. This makes the total strength of Committee of Management as 21. Yet the Regional Level Committee under the order impugned has directed that the elections for remaining three posts of ordinary members of the Committee of Management be held and thereafter papers be submitted for approval of the elections held.
Counsel for the respondents points out that all other surviving members of the general body are related to the office elected. It is in this background that three members have not been elected. There is no provision under the scheme of administration or under the statutory provisions that in absence of complete Committee of Management being constituted, it shall not be recognized.
Prima facie in the facts of this case the order of the Regional Level Committee dated 16.08.2013 appears to be illegal.
Therefore, it is provided that the Regional Level Committee shall reconsider the matter of approval of the elections held in terms of the order passed by this Court within two weeks from today in light of the observations made above. The decision shall be brought on record before this Court by the next date fixed.
A copy of the order may be issued to the learned Standing Counsel for necessary compliance.
List on 07.10.2013.
Dated :05.09.2013
VR/23609/13
