Kuldeep Singh And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 7315 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Kuldeep Singh And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 27 May, 2025

Author: Jayant Banerji

Bench: Jayant Banerji

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90302
 
Court No. - 7
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7498 of 2025
 

 
Petitioner :- Kuldeep Singh And 7 Others
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Siddharth Khare,Sr. Advocate
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J.
 

1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Parashar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel appears for respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4. The respondent no.5 is stated to be a valid Committee of Management by the petitioners.

2. When the matter was taken up today, an impleadment application alongwith vakalatnama has been filed by Sri Girijesh Tiwari, Advocate stating that the impleadment applicant is the approved Committee of Management through its Manager Sri Vinay Kumar. It is stated that a string of disputes that have been described in the instant petition involves the interest of impleadment applicant, inasmuch as at the relevant points of time, he has been contesting the matters before the competent authorities under the Societies Registration Act, the U.P. State Universities Act, as well as before this Court.

3. The impleadment application is allowed. Office is directed to allot a number to the impleadment application. Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to implead Committee of Management through its Manager Vinay Kumar as respondent no.6 in this petition.

4. The petitioners claim to be teachers regularly appointed to a post graduate college by the name of Shri Vishwanath Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Koraon, Allahabad (Prayagraj) which is affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi. The college receives grant-in-aid from the State Government. This college was set up by a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 by the name of Shri Vishwanath Sanskrit Pathshala, Koraon, Tehsil Meja, Allahabad. The college is run by a Committee of Management which is also the Committee of Management of the aforesaid Society.

5. Under challenge in this petition is an order dated 5.4.2025, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Prayagraj. By this order, it has been held that the Selection Committee did not conduct the selection in accordance with the rules and, therefore, the list of the petitioners for appointment in Degree College cannot be approved.

6. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the impugned order, an order of District Inspector of Schools dated 28.3.2023 has been relied upon which order in turn relies upon an order dated 21.10.2021, passed by the Assistant Registrar Firms, Societies and Chits, Prayagraj. This order of 21.10.2021 was itself stayed by an order of this Court dated 29.11.2021 in Writ-C No. 31258 of 2021, which petition is still pending. It is stated that once the order dated 21.10.2021 was stayed by this Court, it was not open for the District Inspector of Schools to rely upon the same while rejecting the claim of the petitioners for grant of approval as teachers to the Degree College.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners has taken the Court through various approvals granted in favour of the respondent no. 5 from time to time with a particular reference to Annexure-4 to the writ petition, which is an order of the Vice Chancellor of the affiliating University (which has not been made a party in the instant case) by which, the claim of Sri Anand Kumar Keshari as Manager of the respondent no. 5 was given approval. Further, list of the Committee of Management of the respondent No. 5 of the year 2017-2018 that appears at page 68 of the writ petition was also referred to, which found approval by the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits. It is stated that the approval granted by the Assistant Registrar to the Committee of Management pertaining to the year 2017-2018 was subjected to challenge by the respondent No. 6 in Writ-C No. 55854 of 2017 which came to be disposed of by means of a judgement dated 18.12.2017 leaving it open to the petitioners therein (that is, the newly impleaded respondent no. 6) to move an application before the Assistant Registrar for making an enquiry under Section 4-B of the Act, 1860. The Assistant Registrar was directed to examine the matter afresh after summoning the original records of the Society and obtaining comments of the office bearers of the managing committee of the society and the respondent no. 8 therein. Thereafter, the order dated 21.10.2021 was passed by the Assistant Registrar, in which it was held that the proceeding for election held on 26.7.2020 that was submitted by Sri Anand Kumar Keshari (respondent no.5) was found to be contrary to the rules. Accordingly, the election proceedings held on 26.7.2020 was set aside. It was observed in that order that neither the respondent no. 5 nor the respondent no.6 could produce the original records of the Society. Accordingly, the representations moved by the respondent nos. 5 and 6 was disposed of. This order of 21.10.2021 was stayed by an interim order of 29.11.2021, passed in the pending Writ-C No. 31258 of 2021.

8. The petitioners filed writ petitions bearing Writ A No.8891 of 2023 and Writ A No.9291 of 2023 seeking direction to the DIOS to consider the claim of financial approval being sought to their appointments made by the Committee of Management pursuant to an advertisement issued on 02.09.2021. These petitions were disposed of by orders dated 22.05.2023 and 25.05.2023 respectively with directions to the DIOS to pass appropriate orders on the representations.

9. By an order dated 28.08.2023, the DIOS granted approval for payment of wages to the petitioners subject to certain conditions. By an order dated 06.11.2023, the DIOS revoked the earlier order of 28.08.2023 and directed refund of salary already disbursed.

10. Against the order dated 06.11.2023, the petitioners along with one Akhil Tripathi filed Writ-A No.20857 of 2023 which petition was allowed by a judgment dated 18.12.2023. Pursuant to the aforesaid judgment of 18.12.2023 the impugned order of 05.04.2025 has been passed.

11. Learned counsel appearing for respondent no.6 has referred to the affidavit filed by him in support of the impleadment application and drawn attention to Annenxure-1 thereof, which reflects that the District Inspector of Schools had accorded approval to the signature of the Manager that is Vinay Kumar (respondent no.6) by means of an order dated 14.12.2020. It is stated that the order of 14.12.2020 has attained finality as it has not been challenged before any court of law. It is stated that the respondent no. 6 then preferred Writ-C No. 14740 of 2024 challenging the order dated 28.3.2024 passed by Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, whereby the list of office bearers of the respondent No. 5 for the year 2023-24 was registered. Pursuant to the order of District Inspector of Schools dated 14.12.2020 approving the signatures of the respondent No.6, the respondent no. 6 was continuing as Manager, but the Assistant Registrar without issuing any notice to the petitioners of the 2024 petition and other concerned parties had registered the list of office bearers and members of the Committee of Management of the Society for the year 2023-2024 of the respondent no. 5 and, therefore, the registration of the list made by order dated 28.3.2024 was unsustainable. After hearing the counsel for the parties, the order dated 28.3.2024 passed by the Assistant Registrar was quashed and the writ petition was allowed.

12. In the aforesaid background, what is required to be seen, inter alia, is whether in the garb of challenging the aforesaid order impugned dated 5.4.2025 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, the petitioners can be permitted to seek approval of the Committee of Management that is respondent no. 5, just because the order of 21.10.2021 passed by the Assistant Registrar of the Society has been stayed by an order of the Court in a pending writ petition. This Court cannot grant approval to the claim of the petitioners that the respondent no. 5 is a validly elected Committee of Management. The rights of the competing committees of management, that is respondent nos. 5 and 6 can be ascertained by the competent authority in case of dispute.

13. It has not been disputed that the order of District Inspector of Schools dated 14.12.2020 attained finality, whereby signatures of Manager of respondent no.6-Committee of Management was accorded approval by the District Inspector of Schools. It is also evident from the affidavit filed in support of the impleadment application that the order of Assistant Registrar of Societies dated 28.3.2024, whereby the list of members of the Committee of Management-respondent No. 5 was approved was quashed by this Court by a judgment dated 24.5.2024 in Writ-C No. 14740 of 2024. The matter was remitted to the Assistant Registrar to be decided afresh. By an order dated 15.10.2024, the Assistant Registrar approved the list of members of the respondent No. 5, but disapproved the list of the respondent No. 6.

14. In the order of 15.10.2024, the election of the respondent No. 6 of 12.7.2020 pursuant to which the DIOS had approved the signature of the Manager of respondent No. 6, was disapproved and that on finding that the list of Committee of Management of the year 2017-18 of the respondent No. 5 which was registered and unchallenged, the representation of the respondent No. 6 was rejected and direction was given to take action on the documents submitted by respondent No. 5. The order dated 15.10.2024 subjected to challenge in Writ-C No. 39210 of 2024 which is pending.

15. In the impugned order of 05.04.2025, the finding is that the selection of the petitioners is not in accordance with the Government Order dated 21.04.1998 and the provisions of Part 02 of Chapter 11 of the Regulations of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University Varanasi and, therefore, the selection cannot be granted approval. Neither the said G.O. nor the Regulations of the University have been placed for consideration of the Court. The allegation in the writ petition that there exists no dispute in the Committee of Management of the Institution is not borne out from the petition.

16. Under the facts and circumstances of the instant case, the petitioners have failed to make out their case in the instant petition. Subject to the requirement of the Government Order and the Regulations of the University being met, the petitioners can then stake their claim at the appropriate stage for which liberty is granted.

17. This petition is dismissed subject to the aforesaid observation.

Order Date :- 27.5.2025

sfa/

(Jayant Banerji, J)