Anuj Singh Chauhan vs Committee Of Management
2026 Latest Caselaw 2317 UK

Uttarakhand High Court

Anuj Singh Chauhan vs Committee Of Management on 24 March, 2026

                                                     2026:UHC:2056-DB
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA

                                 AND

       THE HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI SUBHASH UPADHYAY
                     24th March, 2026

                Special Appeal No. 04 of 2026

Anuj Singh Chauhan                                 ------Appellant

                               Versus

Committee of Management, Rashtriya Inter College,
Rohalki, Bahadarabad, District Haridwar and others

                                                  -----Respondents
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Presence:-

Mr. Siddharth Singh, learned counsel for the appellant.
Mr. Parikshit Saini, learned counsel for the respondent no1.
Mr. S.M.S.Mehta, learned Brief Holder for the State/respondents no. 2 to
5.




JUDGMENT:

(per Manoj Kumar Gupta, C.J.)

1. The present intra court appeal is directed

against the order and judgment of learned Single Judge

dated 30.12.2025, passed in Writ Petition (M/S) No. 1795

of 2024.

2. The writ petition was filed by non-appellant no.

1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner'). It had

challenged orders dated 15.03.2024, 28.06.2024 and

29.06.2024 passed by respondent no.3 Regional

Additional Director, Secondary Education, Garhwal

Region, District Pauri Gahwal. By order dated

2026:UHC:2056-DB 15.03.2024, the Regional Additional Director, acting on a

complaint made by respondent no. 5- the past President

of Rashtriya Inter College, Rohalki, Bahadrabad, District

Haridwar, in respect of induction of 89 members in the

general body of the society, which runs the institution,

held that the induction was illegal and consequently the

unopposed election of the petitioner-Committee of

Management becomes doubtful. He accordingly directed

the District Education Officer to cancel the enrolment of

new members and appoint Authorized Controller for

holding fresh elections. By order dated 28.06.2024, the

Regional Additional Director has reiterated the earlier

order dated 15.03.2024 and by order dated 29.06.2024,

he appointed an Authorized Controller for running the

Rashtriya Inter College, Rohalki, Bahadrabad, District

Haridwar (hereinafter referred to as 'the college').

3. The petitioner claimed to be elected in a

meeting held on 10.04.2023 by the authorized controller.

The election was approved by the Chief Education Officer

on 15.04.2023. The challenge to the orders passed by the

Regional Additional Director was based on the ground

that in the past also the appellant herein, i.e., Anuj Singh

Chauhan, questioned the induction of 89 members on

the ground that they were inducted within 6 months of

2026:UHC:2056-DB the expiry of the term of the Committee of Management,

contrary to Clause-7 of the approved Scheme of

Administration and therefore, the induction of new

members was illegal. The relevant part of the said clause

is as follows:

"izcU/k lfefr dk ;g nkf;Ro gksxk fd lfefr dk rhu o'kZ dk

dk;Zdky iw.kZ gksus ls 6 ekg iwoZ lnL; cukus dh izfdz;k iw.kZ djsxh]

ftlls ;Fkk le; lfefr ds pquko djk;s tk ldsa rFkk izcU/k lapkyd dh

fu;qfDr dh fLFkfr mRiUUk u gksA"

4. The challenge was duly entertained and

inquired into by the Chief Execution Officer and

ultimately, by order dated 07.02.2023, the Chief

Education Officer held that the members were duly

inducted. Accordingly, he approved the list of members.

The case of the petitioner in the writ petition was that the

said order had attained finality, as it was not challenged

in appeal before the Regional Additional Director,

Secondary Education, which was permissible under

Clause 13 (2) of the Scheme of Administration.

Thereafter, the election was held on 10.04.2023 by the

Authorized Controller and the same was duly approved

on 15.04.2023. After the election was held, the appellant

questioned the validity of the elections by means of a

complaint dated 10.03.2024 by again racking up the

issue relating to alleged wrongful induction of members

2026:UHC:2056-DB before the Additional Director of Education though the

order of Chief Education Officer dated 07.02.2023 had

attained finality as no appeal was preferred against the

said order. It was also the case of the petitioner that, in

any event, the appellant was questioning the election of

the Committee of Management and, for which the remedy

was available under Section 25 of the Societies

Registration Act.

5. The learned Single Judge has examined the

issues in great detail and has thereafter recorded the

following findings:-

(A) The complaint filed by respondent no. 5 against

induction of 89 members in the General Body was

duly entertained by the Chief Education Officer

and after due inquiry, he upheld the enrolment of

new members by order dated 07.02.2023. Under

Clause 13(2) of the Scheme of Administration, an

appeal lies against the order of Chief Education

Officer to Regional Additional Director but no such

appeal was filed.

(B) The power of Chief Executive Officer and Additional

Director are concurrent and once the complaint

was filed before the Chief Education Officer and it

was duly inquired and a decision is taken

2026:UHC:2056-DB thereupon, similar complaint was not maintainable

before the Regional Additional Director.

(C) The provision in Clause-7 in the Scheme of

Administration providing for enrolment of members

before six months of the expiry of the term of the

Committee of Management is only directory and

not mandatory as the Scheme does not provide for

any adverse consequences. Moreover, intention of

the provision is only to ensure holding of timely

election and not to per se invalidate the enrolment,

if otherwise validity made.

(D) The appellant had in fact questioned the election

held with the inclusion of newly enrolled members,

for which remedy is provided under Section 25 of

the Societies Registration Act, which he can avail.

(E) There was no dispute between the parties

regarding effective control of the affairs of the

Institution as the appellant never claimed to be in

control of the Management and, therefore, the

power vested in the Regional Additional Director of

Education under Section 29 (7) of the Uttarakhand

School Education Act, 2006 was not available for

passing any order.

2026:UHC:2056-DB

6. We notice that the appellant had indulged in

successive rounds of litigation. His first writ petition was

dismissed by the Court on 12.12.2022 after finding that

the appellant had already availed the remedy of Civil Suit

being O.S. No. 4 of 2022, and which was pending at the

relevant time. Against the said order the appellant filed

Special Appeal, which was dismissed on 03.03.2023.

Thereafter, the appellant withdrew the suit and filed a

fresh suit, being O.S. No.53 of 2023 for declaration that

the induction of newly elected members was illegal. By

means of amendment, the appellant also sought

declaration that election held on basis of the said list be

declared illegal and void. The appellant, withdrew the

said suit on 14.05.2024. He thereafter got a Writ Petition

filed through one Yogesh Kumar challenging the election

of the Committee of Management on the ground that

individual notices were not given to the members as per

the Scheme of Administration. The said Writ Petition was

also withdrawn on 23.10.2024. The initial complaint as

already noted came to be decided by the Chief Education

Officer on 07.02.2023 and thereafter without filing any

appeal against the same, another complaint was filed

before the Additional Director of Education and wherein

the appellant succeeded in obtaining favourable order in

2026:UHC:2056-DB his favour which has now been set aside by the writ

court.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that

the sole question for consideration in the instant appeal

is whether the requirement in Clause-7 of the Scheme of

Administration that power of enrolment of new members

could be exercised only before six months of the expiry of

the term of the Committee of Management can be held to

be directory as has been done by the learned Single

Judge or it is a mandatory provision. In support of the

submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgments

reported in AIR 1961 Supreme Court 751 (V48 C 119),

State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. Babu Ram Upadhya;

reported in AIR 1965 Supreme Court 895 (V 52 C 141)

Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd., Rampur vs. The Municipal

Board, Rampur; and Balwant Singh and others vs. Anand

Kumar Sharma and others, reported in, (2003) 3 Supreme

Court Cases 433.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant does not

dispute that in an earlier complaint filed before Chief

Education Officer, after due inquiry, the plea was

repelled by order dated 07.02.2023 and although under

the Scheme of Administration vide Clause 13(2) appeal

lies against the said order before the Director of

2026:UHC:2056-DB Education but no such appeal was filed. The issue was

racked up by way of fresh complaint before the Regional

Additional Director of Education after fresh election were

held and approved. It is also not disputed that the power

of the Chief Education Officer and the Additional

Director, in relation to complaints against any illegal

induction of members, is concurrent in nature and,

therefore, once complaint was filed before the Chief

Education Officer and it was entertained and rejected,

similar complaint would not be maintainable before the

Regional Additional Director of Education. In view of it,

we do not consider it necessary to dwell on the question

raised by learned counsel for the appellant regarding

mandatory or directory nature of Clause 7 of the Scheme

of Administration.

9. It is not disputed before us that the appellant

had earlier filed two writ petitions which were

subsequently withdrawn/dismissed and even the Civil

Suit was also filed and after sometime it was also

withdrawn.

10. The appellant, on the face it, has been abusing

the process of court and once the fact that the order of

Chief Education Officer dated 07.02.2023 was not

challenged in appeal is not disputed, nor dismissal of the

2026:UHC:2056-DB previous writ petitions and withdrawal of the Civil Suit

filed for the selfsame relief for declaration of induction of

new members as illegal, we feel that filing of fresh

complaint before the Additional Director of Education

was gross abuse of the legal process. In line with the

same, we also feel that filing of the present appeal is also

abuse of process of law and it being devoid of any merit is

dismissed with a cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One

Lakh) to be deposited by the petitioner before the

Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority within two

weeks from today, failing which, the cost would be

recovered as arrears of land Revenue.

11. Pending application, if any, also stands

disposed of.

(MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA, C.J.)

(SUBHASH UPADHYAY, J.) Dated: 24.03.2026 Kaushal