C/M Adarsh Janta Shikshan ... vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 11365 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


 
RESERVED
 
Court No. - 35
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 22503 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- C/M Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan And Another
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Gurudeen Vishwakarma
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 

 
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.

1. Heard Shri Sudhir Kumar @ Sudhir Singh Chauhan, learned counsel holding brief of Shri G.D. Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State-respondents.

2. The array of parties in the present writ petition is as follows:-

"1. Committee of Management, Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan, Village Saraiya, P.O. Awazpur, District Farrukhabad through its Legal Manager Smt. Munni Devi

2. Smt. Munni Devi Wife of Late Dev Singh, Senior Citizen, R/o Village Saraiya, P.O. Awazpur, District Farrukhabad, Legal Manager of Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan, Village Saraiya, P.O. Awazpur, District Farrukhabad.

....... Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Uttar Pradesh through its Finance Secretary, U.P. Secretariat, Lucknow.

2. Deputy Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Kanpur Division, Kanpur. Address 127/80 S Block, Juhi, Shakti Nagar, Kanpur.

3. District Inspector of Schools, Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad.

4. Anurag Dubey Son of Late Raj Bahadur Dubey, Resident of Diggi Tal, Farrukhabad at present trespasser/so-called Manager of Adarsh Janta. Shikshan Sansthan, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Farrukhabad.

..........Respondents"

3. This writ petition has been filed with the following prayers:-

"a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERIORARI to quash the impugned exparte judgment and order dated 23.01.2021 passed by respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 26 to this writ petition).

b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERIORARI to quash the impugned notice No. 3058 (1) dated 25.03.2022 and impugned notice No. 375 dated 07.05.2022 issued by respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 26 & 49 respectively to this writ petition).

c) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to quash the renewal certificate dated 04.03.2020 issued by respondent no. 2 (Annexure No. 35 to this writ petition).

d) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS to direct respondent no. 2 to register the list of Committee of Management of the petitioner of year 2016-17 and of year 2022-23 (Annexure No. 48 to this writ petition).

e) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS to direct respondent no. 2 not to pass any further order in favour of respondent no. 4 till the final order and judgment of this Hon'ble Court.

f) issue any other suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

g) Award the costs of this writ petition to the petitioners."

4. It is stated in the writ petition that one late Dev Singh, Pradhan of Village-Saraiya, Post-Awazpur, District-Farrukhabad, made substantial contributions for setting up of an Institution and a Scheme of Administration dated 30.09.1980 of Rashtriya Janta Junior High School, Saraiya, Farrukhabad was submitted. The respondent no.2 issued a registration certificate of 12.12.1980 in favour of Adarsh Janta Junior High School Samiti, Saraiya, Post-Awazpur, District-Farrukhabad. The land on which the institution stands was also contributed due to the efforts of Dev Singh. One Janki Prasad Shakya was directly elected as new Manager on 08.06.1987 after the previous Manager resigned from his post. It is alleged that the election of Janki Prasad Shakya as Manager was illegal. It is stated that in respect of the land of the institution, the Settlement Officer of Consolidation passed an order on 10.04.1996 in Suit No.1242 of 1996 under Section 12 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, whereafter Janki Prasad Shakya got his name entered in the Khatauni in which the name of the Institution was entered. It is alleged that when the Manager Janki Prasad Shakya started committing illegalities, Shailendra Singh, son of the aforesaid late Dev Singh submitted proceedings of an election dated 15.09.2004 alongwith the list of Committee of Management and other documents in respect of which notice was issued by the respondent no.2 to Janki Prasad Shakya. An application was also filed by Janki Prasad Shakya for renewal of registration of the Society. It is stated that without sending any notice at the correct address of Shailendra Singh, the respondent no.4 proceeded to pass an order dated 18.01.2005 approving the list of Committee of Management for the year 2004-05 submitted by Janki Prasad Shakya.

5. It is further stated in the petition that since the alleged Committee of Management of Janki Prasad Shakya had lost effective control over the function of the Institution, hence, to save the property of the Institution, the petitioner no.2 being wife of the promoter, late Dev Singh, was compelled to form her Committee of Management for which a meeting of the General Body was called on 09.04.2017. It is stated that in the meanwhile, Janki Prasad Shakya, vide his letter dated 22.03.2017, submitted a list of his alleged Committee of Management and General Body alongwith unaudited income and expenditure details for registering the Committee of Management for the year 2016-17. By the letter dated 15.04.2017, the respondent no.2 informed the aforesaid Janki Prasad Shakya, with a copy endorsed to Shailendra Singh at his correct address, to submit his report in respect of certain complaints received. It is stated that the respondent no.2, by another letter dated 15.04.2017, registered the list of the Committee of Management submitted by Janki Prasad Shakya for the year 2017-18. It is further stated that Janki Prasad Shakya appointed his real son Himanshu as the Principal of the Institution but never included his name and two teachers as ex-officio members in the list of the Committee of Management. It is stated in the petition that one Sudhir Singh Chauhan lodged an FIR in Police Station-Maudarwaja, District-Farrukhabad on 11.11.2017 against Janki Prasad Shakya under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 IPC.

6. By means of an order dated 17.01.2018, the respondent no.2 considered the rival claims and found that the actual Manager of Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan is Janki Prasad Shakya and under whose Managership, the Committee of Management constituted for the year 2017-18 was registered by his office on 13.04.2017 and the list of Committee of Management that was got registered by Janki Prasad Shakya was declared valid. It is also held in that order of 17.01.2018 that Smt. Munni Devi (petitioner no.2) and Shailendra Singh are not lawful members of the Society, and all documents submitted by them including the list of member of the Committee of Management for the year 2016-17 and forms cannot be accepted. Accordingly, it was held that all documents submitted by Smt. Munni Devi and Shailendra Singh being fabricated were rejected, and the registered list of members of the Committee of Management of Janki Prasad Shakya for the year 2017-18 was declared lawful.

7. It is stated that the dispute of the Committee of Management was brought before this Court by means of writ petition, being Writ-C No.15547 of 2018 (Smt. Munni Devi vs. State of U.P. & 4 Ors.). Counter affidavit was directed to be filed by the respondents. It is stated that till date none of the respondents have filed counter affidavit in that writ petition. It is stated that during the pendency of the aforesaid writ petition, Janki Prasad Shakya and his Committee of Management resigned on 04.12.2020 and submitted the resignation before the respondent the respondent no.2. In breach of the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, 18601, Janki Prasad Shakya transferred the property of the Institution. The petitioners then filed a writ petition, being Writ-C No.33352 of 2019 (Munni Devi vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) seeking mandamus for directing the respondent nos.1 to 4 therein to dispossess the respondent nos.5 to 7 therein from illegal possession of land of the Institution bearing certain Khatauni numbers. That writ petition came to be dismissed by means of a judgment and order dated 18.10.2019 on the ground of alternative remedy. It is stated that thereafter a civil suit, being Original Suit No.257 of 2021 (Munni Devi vs. Ajit Singh & Ors.), was filed for eviction of the defendants and for injunction as well as for granting the plaintiff's possession of the land in dispute, which civil suit is pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fatehgarh, Farrukhabad.

8. It is stated that on 11.12.2020, the respondent no.4 submitted an application before the respondent no.2 to register the list of the Committee of Management of Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan for the year 2020-21. It is stated that the fact of pendency of the Writ-C No.15547 of 2018 was concealed. By means of a letter dated 23.01.2021, the Committee of Management of the respondent no.4 has been registered and renewal certificate was also issued by the respondent no.2. It is stated that the General Body of the Committee of Management of the respondent no.4 that was constituted, is not permitted by the Scheme of Administration. It is stated that in view of the complaint made by the petitioner no.2, the respondent no.2 issued notice dated 25.03.2022 to the petitioner no.2 as well as to the respondent no.4. Another notice dated 07.05.2022 was issued to the petitioner no.2. Several allegations of mismanagement and fraud have also been made in the writ petition.

9. Under challenge in the present writ petition is an order dated 23.01.2021, which is a communication sent by the respondent no.2 addressed to the Manager of Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Farrukhabad, registering the list of Committee of Management of the Institution for the year 2020-21. Both notices dated 25.03.2022 and 07.05.2022 have been issued by the respondent no.2 to the petitioner no.2 to appear for hearing in the matter of the Institution-Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan. The petitioner has not been able to demonstrate as to how these notices dated 25.03.2022 and 07.05.2022 are without jurisdiction.

The petitioner has also challenged the renewal certificate dated 04.03.2020 of the Society-Adarsh Janta Shikshan Sansthan, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Farrukhabad. Also, writ of mandamus has been sought for a direction to the respondent no. 2 to register the list of Committee of Management of the petitioners for the year 2016-17 and for a direction to the respondent no.2 not to pass any further order in favour of the respondent no.4 till the final judgment of this Court.

10. As far as the challenge to the order dated 23.01.2021 and the renewal certificate of the Society dated 04.03.2020, both issued by the respondent no.2, are concerned, their adjudication involves consideration of disputed questions of fact. The order dated 17.01.2018 passed by the respondent no.2, which operates against the petitioners is subject matter of challenge before this Court in the aforementioned Writ-C No.15547 of 2018, which is pending admission and no interim order is in operation. By the aforesaid order of 17.01.2018, Smt. Munni Devi (petitioner no.2) and Shailendra Singh were held to be not lawful members of the Society, and all documents submitted by them including the list of member of the Committee of Management for the year 2016-17 and forms were rejected as being fabricated and the registered list of members of the Committee of Management of Janki Prasad Shakya for the year 2017-18 was declared lawful. Under such circumstances, mere pendency of the writ petition cannot be used as a tool to thwart the steps and actions taken by the respondent no.2 granting renewal of registration of the Society and approval/ registration of the list of Committee of Management of the Society for the year 2020-21.

11. Therefore, if the petitioner is so advised, she may file a civil suit to challenge the order dated 23.01.2021 where all the disputed questions of fact, including the allegation of misrepresentation and fraud, can be adjudicated. In U.P. State Bridge Corpn. Ltd. v. U.P. Rajya Setu Nigam S. Karamchari Sangh2, the Supreme Court has held that it is an established practice that the Court exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 should refuse to do so where there are disputed questions of fact.

12. Further, in case the petitioners are aggrieved by the renewal of the registration granted by the respondent no.2 which was issued on 04.03.2020, they have a remedy under sub-section (2) of Section 12 (D) of the Act of 1860 (U.P. Amendment), on the grounds specified in sub-section (1) of Section 12 (D) of the Act of 1860 by preferring an appeal before the Commissioner of the Division in whose jurisdiction the headquarter of the Society lies. The petitioners have not been able to make out a strong case for interference in this writ petition. In U.P. State Bridge Corpn. Ltd. (supra) it has also been observed as follows:-

12. Although these observations were made in the context of the jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain the proceedings relating to an industrial dispute and may not be read as a limitation on the Court's powers under Article 226, nevertheless it would need a very strong case indeed for the High Court to deviate from the principle that where a specific remedy is given by the statute, the person who insists upon such remedy can avail of the process as provided in that statute and in no other manner.

13. The relief of mandamus also cannot be granted as the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any legally enforceable right in her favour.

14. For the reasons aforesaid, interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in this matter is declined and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 29.08.2022

SK

(Jayant Banerji, J.)