Chandrashekhar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/486108
SubjectElection
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided OnAug-11-2004
Case NumberC.M.W.P. No. 42467 of 2003
JudgeArun Tandon, J.
Reported in2004(4)AWC3649
ActsUttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - Sections 16A and 16AA
AppellantChandrashekhar Pandey
RespondentState of U.P. and ors.
Appellant AdvocateA.P. Tiwari and ;S.S. Tripathi, Advs.
Respondent AdvocateR.K. Ojha, S.C.
DispositionPetition allowed
Excerpt:
- - the reports of the district inspector of schools as well as of the finance and audit officer are only pieces of evidence.arun tandon, j.1. heard sri a. p. tiwari on behalf of the petitioner, sri r. k. ojha on behalf of respondent no. 4 and the standing counsel on behalf of respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. sri chandrashekhar pandey, the outgoing president of the committee of management of pandit deen dayal shiksha samiti, pipraich, gorakhpur, has filed this writ petition against the decision of the regional level committee taken in its meeting held on 2.5.2003, contained in annexure-13 to the writ petition, as also against the consequential action taken in pursuance thereof by the district inspector of schools dated 29.5.2003, contained in annexure- 14, whereby the signature of sri hari lal ram rayaka has been attested as manager of the committee of management of the said institution.3. it is not in dispute that the last elections of the committee of management had taken place in the year 1999. in the said elections the petitioner chandrashekhar pandey was elected as president while sri hari lal ram rayaka was elected as manager. since the term of the committee of management was due to expire in the month of august, 2002 proceedings for holding fresh elections of the committee of management were initiated. from the order of district inspector of schools dated 23.10.2002, annexure-2 to the writ petition, it is established beyond doubt that the district inspector of schools required the president and the manager of the institution to submit a list of the members of the general body signed by them jointly.4. it is further not in dispute that no such list of members signed by the president and the manager of the outgoing committee of management was submitted to the district inspector of schools. further on 3.11.2002, the district inspector of schools is alleged to have granted permission to the manager to hold fresh elections of the committee of management for which 8.11.2002 was fixed. in pursuance of the aforesaid permission of the district inspector of schools it is claimed that fresh elections of the committee of management took place on 8.11.2002. against the aforesaid elections a detailed objection was filed by the outgoing president, namely the petitioner, on 12.11.2002, before the joint director of education, a copy of which is annexure-11 to the writ petition. the said objection was supported by an affidavit. in the said objection it has been specifically stated that in compliance of the order of the district inspector of schools dated 23.10.2002 no list of members of the general body signed by the president and manager jointly was submitted and it was further stated that the controversy with regard to the list of valid members of the general body was referred to the assistant registrar as per the letter dated 7.11.2002. before the assistant registrar two separate lists, containing the names of 73 members in the list submitted by the manager and 93 members in the list submitted by the president were filed. the assistant registrar by means of his letter dated 7.11.2002 informed the parties that the dispute with regard to the membership is still under consideration and, therefore, no list of valid members can be submitted before the finalisation of the controversy.5. from the record it is further established that on the objection so filed by the petitioner the regional level committee required the finance and audit officer in the office of the regional joint director of education to submit his report. the report is alleged to have been submitted by the finance and audit officer on 11.11.2002. the regional level committee thereafter proceeded to take the impugned decision in its meeting dated 2nd may, 2003 and has approved the elections dated 8.11.2002.6. from the decision of the regional level committee which has been brought on record as annexure- 13 to the writ petition it is clear that except for referring to the reports submitted by the district inspector of schools and the finance and audit officer in the office of regional joint director of education, absolutely no findings have been recorded for coming to the conclusion that the alleged elections dated 8.11.2002 are legal and valid. the order of the regional level committee is completely silent with regard to basic objections of the petitioner that the list of members of the general body was neither finalised nor any list was submitted under joint signature of president and manager. the objections filed by the petitioner have not been considered by the regional level committee nor any finding has been recorded in respect thereto, the impugned order of regional level committee cannot be sustained.7. on behalf of respondents it is stated that in the elections held in the year 1999 there were initially 77 members of the general body and those elections were duly recognised. out of the said list 3 members had expired and 3 others did not submit their membership fee. accordingly the membership was reduced to 71. it is further stated that the president of the institution himself had required the respondent-manager to submit the list of the members of the general body before the district inspector of schools vide letter dated 2.11.2002. under the scheme of administration it is the manager of the institution who is entitled to submit the list to the district inspector of schools. therefore, the list as submitted by the manager on 3.11.2002 on the basis of which the district inspector of schools granted permission to the manager to hold elections cannot be faulted with.8. in the opinion of the court the impugned order contains no reasons and is only based on the reports submitted by the district inspector of schools and finance and audit officer of the office of regional joint director of education. the reports of the district inspector of schools as well as of the finance and audit officer are only pieces of evidence. it was mandatory for the regional level committee to record findings for coming to conclusion that the elections dated 8.11.2002 were held in accordance with law after finalising the list of members of the general body. in this regard reference may be had to the cases of air 1976 sc 1785 and air 1970 sc 1302, wherein it has been held that in absence of the reasons and findings having been recorded an order which affects the valuable civil rights of a party cannot be sustained. the hon'ble supreme court in the case in air 1990 sc 1984, has further held that recording of reasons is one of the three principles of natural justice. in view of the said legal position the impugned order which is not supported by any reasons and findings, is not sustainable.9. the contentions raised on behalf of the respondents cannot be read in support of or to supplement the reasons which are required to be recorded by the regional level committee. contention raised on behalf of the respondents cannot be a substitute for the reasons which should have been recorded by the regional level committee. the orders are to be judged on the reasons recorded therein. (ref. air 1978 sc 851).10. it is further stated on behalf of the respondents that in the present writ petition an interim order was granted on 19.9.2003. against the said interim order special appeal no. 1076 of 2003 was preferred by the answering respondents and a division bench of this court passed an order of status quo, by means of order dated 22.10.2003. it is, therefore, submitted that till fresh decision of the regional level committee the present management be not disturbed. in the opinion of the court the interim order passed in the present writ petition which was modified in special appeal cannot affect the decision of the writ petition on merits. since the impugned order dated 2.5.2003 passed by the regional level committee and the consequential order dated 29.5.2003 passed by the district inspector of schools are being set aside by this court, the respondents cannot have any right to control the institution.11. the writ petition is allowed. the order dated 2.5.2003, contained in annexure-13 to the writ petition and the order dated 29.5.2003, contained in annexure-14 to the writ petition, are set aside. the matter is remanded to the regional level committee to decide the legality or otherwise of the elections dated 8.11.2002 after considering the objections filed by the petitioner, by means of reasoned speaking order, within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. it is further clarified that the regional level committee shall afford opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. till the decision of the regional level committee or till fresh elections are held, as the case may be, the district 'inspector of schools shall manage the institution.
Judgment:

Arun Tandon, J.

1. Heard Sri A. P. Tiwari on behalf of the petitioner, Sri R. K. Ojha on behalf of respondent No. 4 and the standing counsel on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.

2. Sri Chandrashekhar Pandey, the outgoing President of the Committee of Management of Pandit Deen Dayal Shiksha Samiti, Pipraich, Gorakhpur, has filed this writ petition against the decision of the Regional Level Committee taken in its meeting held on 2.5.2003, contained in Annexure-13 to the writ petition, as also against the consequential action taken in pursuance thereof by the District Inspector of Schools dated 29.5.2003, contained in Annexure- 14, whereby the signature of Sri Hari Lal Ram Rayaka has been attested as Manager of the Committee of Management of the said institution.

3. It is not in dispute that the last elections of the Committee of Management had taken place in the year 1999. In the said elections the petitioner Chandrashekhar Pandey was elected as President while Sri Hari Lal Ram Rayaka was elected as Manager. Since the term of the Committee of Management was due to expire in the month of August, 2002 proceedings for holding fresh elections of the Committee of Management were initiated. From the order of District Inspector of Schools dated 23.10.2002, Annexure-2 to the writ petition, it is established beyond doubt that the District Inspector of Schools required the President and the Manager of the institution to submit a list of the members of the general body signed by them jointly.

4. It is further not in dispute that no such list of members signed by the President and the Manager of the outgoing Committee of Management was submitted to the District Inspector of Schools. Further on 3.11.2002, the District Inspector of Schools is alleged to have granted permission to the Manager to hold fresh elections of the Committee of Management for which 8.11.2002 was fixed. In pursuance of the aforesaid permission of the District Inspector of Schools it is claimed that fresh elections of the Committee of Management took place on 8.11.2002. Against the aforesaid elections a detailed objection was filed by the outgoing President, namely the petitioner, on 12.11.2002, before the Joint Director of Education, a copy of which is Annexure-11 to the writ petition. The said objection was supported by an affidavit. In the said objection it has been specifically stated that in compliance of the order of the District Inspector of Schools dated 23.10.2002 no list of members of the general body signed by the President and Manager jointly was submitted and it was further stated that the controversy with regard to the list of valid members of the general body was referred to the Assistant Registrar as per the letter dated 7.11.2002. Before the Assistant Registrar two separate lists, containing the names of 73 members in the list submitted by the Manager and 93 members in the list submitted by the President were filed. The Assistant Registrar by means of his letter dated 7.11.2002 informed the parties that the dispute with regard to the membership is still under consideration and, therefore, no list of valid members can be submitted before the finalisation of the controversy.

5. From the record It is further established that on the objection so filed by the petitioner the Regional Level Committee required the Finance and Audit Officer in the office of the Regional Joint Director of Education to submit his report. The report is alleged to have been submitted by the Finance and Audit Officer on 11.11.2002. The Regional Level Committee thereafter proceeded to take the impugned decision in its meeting dated 2nd May, 2003 and has approved the elections dated 8.11.2002.

6. From the decision of the Regional Level Committee which has been brought on record as Annexure- 13 to the writ petition It is clear that except for referring to the reports submitted by the District Inspector of Schools and the Finance and Audit Officer in the office of Regional Joint Director of Education, absolutely no findings have been recorded for coming to the conclusion that the alleged elections dated 8.11.2002 are legal and valid. The order of the Regional Level Committee is completely silent with regard to basic objections of the petitioner that the list of members of the general body was neither finalised nor any list was submitted under joint signature of President and Manager. The objections filed by the petitioner have not been considered by the Regional Level Committee nor any finding has been recorded in respect thereto, the impugned order of Regional Level Committee cannot be sustained.

7. On behalf of respondents it is stated that in the elections held in the year 1999 there were initially 77 members of the general body and those elections were duly recognised. Out of the said list 3 members had expired and 3 others did not submit their membership fee. Accordingly the membership was reduced to 71. It is further stated that the President of the institution himself had required the respondent-Manager to submit the list of the members of the general body before the District Inspector of Schools vide letter dated 2.11.2002. Under the scheme of administration it is the Manager of the institution who is entitled to submit the list to the District Inspector of Schools. Therefore, the list as submitted by the Manager on 3.11.2002 on the basis of which the District Inspector of Schools granted permission to the Manager to hold elections cannot be faulted with.

8. In the opinion of the Court the impugned order contains no reasons and is only based on the reports submitted by the District Inspector of Schools and Finance and Audit Officer of the office of Regional Joint Director of Education. The reports of the District Inspector of Schools as well as of the Finance and Audit Officer are only pieces of evidence. It was mandatory for the Regional Level Committee to record findings for coming to conclusion that the elections dated 8.11.2002 were held in accordance with law after finalising the list of members of the general body. In this regard reference may be had to the cases of AIR 1976 SC 1785 and AIR 1970 SC 1302, wherein it has been held that in absence of the reasons and findings having been recorded an order which affects the valuable civil rights of a party cannot be sustained. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case in AIR 1990 SC 1984, has further held that recording of reasons is one of the three principles of natural justice. In view of the said legal position the impugned order which is not supported by any reasons and findings, is not sustainable.

9. The contentions raised on behalf of the respondents cannot be read in support of or to supplement the reasons which are required to be recorded by the Regional Level Committee. Contention raised on behalf of the respondents cannot be a substitute for the reasons which should have been recorded by the Regional Level Committee. The orders are to be Judged on the reasons recorded therein. (Ref. AIR 1978 SC 851).

10. It is further stated on behalf of the respondents that in the present writ petition an interim order was granted on 19.9.2003. Against the said interim order Special Appeal No. 1076 of 2003 was preferred by the answering respondents and a Division Bench of this Court passed an order of status quo, by means of order dated 22.10.2003. It is, therefore, submitted that till fresh decision of the Regional Level Committee the present management be not disturbed. In the opinion of the Court the interim order passed in the present writ petition which was modified in special appeal cannot affect the decision of the writ petition on merits. Since the impugned order dated 2.5.2003 passed by the Regional Level Committee and the consequential order dated 29.5.2003 passed by the District Inspector of Schools are being set aside by this Court, the respondents cannot have any right to control the institution.

11. The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 2.5.2003, contained in Annexure-13 to the writ petition and the order dated 29.5.2003, contained in Annexure-14 to the writ petition, are set aside. The matter is remanded to the Regional Level Committee to decide the legality or otherwise of the elections dated 8.11.2002 after considering the objections filed by the petitioner, by means of reasoned speaking order, within one month from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before it. It is further clarified that the Regional Level Committee shall afford opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned. Till the decision of the Regional Level Committee or till fresh elections are held, as the case may be, the District 'Inspector of Schools shall manage the institution.