Ajay Kumar vs Regional Additional Director And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 588 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                  Writ Petition No. 10 of 2022 (M/S)

Ajay Kumar                                                    .....Petitioner.
                                        Versus
Regional Additional Director and others  .... Respondents
                           With
          Writ Petition No. 186 of 2022 (M/S)

Gurdayal Singh                                                .....Petitioner.
                                        Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others                               .... Respondents


Present :
Mr. Amar Murti Shukla, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. M.S. Bisht, Brief Holder, for the State of Uttarakhand.

                                                      Dated: 7th March, 2022

                                JUDGEMENT

Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

These are two Writ Petitions. In Writ Petition No. 10 of 2022, the petitioner has put a challenge to the publication as made by the Election Committee for conducting the election of the Committee of Management of the Institution of respondent No. 3.

2. In the connected Writ Petition, being Writ Petition No. 186 of 2022, which has been preferred by the petitioner, contending and claiming himself to be the Manager of the Institution of respondent No. 3, therein, had put a challenge to the order of 12th January, 2022, as it had been passed by respondent No.2, and simultaneously, has also made a prayer to issue an appropriate direction to responding No. 2, to

complete the election of the aided Institution, called as "Ranveer Singh Dhillon Janata Education Samiti".

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner of Writ Petition No.10 of 2022, had submitted, that the aided Institutions, as aforesaid, their administration is governed in accordance with the provisions contained under Uttarakhand School Education Act, and as per the provisions of the said Act, and the Regulations framed thereunder, it provided a stipulation contained under Section 29, that the Management of an aided Institution, its internal management, would be governed by an approved Scheme of Administration and the petitioner contends that the said Scheme of Administration of the Institution of respondent No. 3 of Writ Petition No.10 of 2022, is governed by the scheme, which stood approved by Resolution No. 2 by the Correspondence No. 354 dated 16th April, 2015.

4. In view of the aforesaid approved Scheme of Administration, the process of election of the Committee, has been provided under Clause 9, and if the procedure for induction of Members to the Committee is taken into consideration, that is contemplated under Clause 7. But, however, for the purposes of the election under Clause 9, in order to entitle a candidate thus inducted under Clause 7, to make him eligible to cast his vote in the election to be conducted under Clause 9, he ought to have been inducted into the Committee of the Society six months prior to the date of cessation of terms of the Committee of Management, which in the instant case happens to be of 4th March, 2021.

5. The advertisement as such, which has been issued and impugned in the Writ Petition, for conducting the election process since being contrary to Clause 9 and the procedure for induction of its member itself was defaulted because of the non compliance of the stipulations contained under Clause 7 to be read with Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration.

6. In that eventuality, if at all, any election was to be conducted, it ought to be conducted after exclusion of the members, who have been inducted or shown to have been inducted into the body, but on the basis of the instructions, which has been received by the learned Standing Counsel, it has been informed by him, that as per the instructions, which he has received by him from the Office of the Chief Education Officer, Udham Singh Nagar, vide his correspondence No. 12281 dated 4th January, 2022, in fact, while initiating the process of election, the Office of the Chief Education Officer, vide his letter dated 3rd September, 2021, which was issued through Block Education Officer, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, who was appointed as an Enquiry Officer, to submit the report, and according to the report, which was thus submitted by the Block Education Officer, vide his Correspondence No. 396 dated 4th October, 2021, and on considering the report of the Block Education Officer, the entire process, which was resorted to for inducting the members was held to be rightly inducted in view of the observations made, which were based on the report of the Block Education Officer, and the enquiry report,

which had been thus submitted and the induction of Members have been approved by the Chief Education Officer, vide its Letter No. 11982 dated 27th September, 2021.

7. In fact, either the report which was submitted by the Block Education Officer, submitted in pursuance to the directions of the Office of the Chief Education Officer or the approval of the list of members as made on 27th September, 2021, is not a subject matter of challenge nor it had been ever a subject matter under challenge, in any of the Writ Petitions.

8. Even the petitioner has confined his argument, to the election programme as was published by the respondents by the advertisement, which is under challenge limited on the pretext, that the induction of Members, who were expected to participate in the election process to be held in pursuance to the advertisement impugned in the Writ Petition, since the induction itself has been contrary to Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration, the election ought to be conducted qua the Members, who were the Members of the Society prior to the approval list of 27th September, 2021.

9. His contention is that the said approved list of 27.09.2021, cannot be taken as to be a foundation and the entitlement of the Members to cast their vote in the election process, since their induction itself according to him was defaulted.

10. On this aspect, as to whether the induction of the Members made into the Society, who would be participating

in the election in pursuance to the impugned advertisement is faulted or not, is no more an issue, which could be put to challenge by the petitioner under the garb of putting a challenge to the advertisement, until and unless, he has challenged the approved list of members dated 27.09.2021 itself, as it was issued by the Office of the Chief Education Officer, vide his Letter No. 11982 dated 27th September, 2021. But, the fact remains, that the period of the previously elected body of the Committee of Management had expired on 4th March, 2021, and as such, the outgoing body, could no more, can now conduct an election of the Committee under the Scheme of Administration.

11. The learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted, that the Chief Education Officer had no power to review the list of already inducted members in pursuance to the directives which had been issued by the Letter of 1st September, 2021. In fact, this issue is not open to be argued by the petitioner, for the reason being that the order of 1st September, 2021, itself is not a subject matter of challenge in Writ Petitions nor this order prevails as of now, in view of the subsequent approved list of members, which was issued subsequent in time i.e. on 27th September, 2021.

12. In that eventuality, in order to settle the issue, in fact, the purpose of the advertisement for conducting the election for constituting the elected body of Committee of Management, itself has become non est, hence, this Court is of the view that the dispute, as raised in the Writ Petition pertaining to the election of the Committee of respondent No.

3, could be resolved, if the Chief Education Officer, is directed to appoint an Authorised Controller, within the period of one week from date of the receipt of this judgment and who is directed to conduct the election of the Committee of Management as per Clause 9 of the Scheme of Administration, based upon the approved list of Members dated 27th September, 2021, which has attained finality. The entire exercise of election of the Committee of Management would be conducted by the Authorised Controller to be thus appointed by the Chief Education Officer by following the specific time schedules, as provided under Clause 9 within the period of two months from today.

13. Subject to the aforesaid observations, the Writ Petitions stand disposed of.

14. The Registry is directed to ensure that the copy of this judgment is sent to the Office of Chief Education Officer, District Udham Singh Nagar for necessary compliance.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 07.03.2022 Shiv