SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1975 Supreme(Pat) 102

PATNA HIGH COURT
B.D.Singh and B.P.Sinha JJ.
Jadunandan Puri
Versus
President, Board Of Secondary Education, Bihar, Patna
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 364 of 1974 ;
Decided On : APRIL 25, 1975

A person who, by their actions or conduct, intentionally causes or permits another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, cannot later deny the truth of that thing in a legal proceeding.

Headnote:

ESTOPPEL - APPOINTMENT OF HEAD MASTER - AD HOC MANAGING COMMITTEE - ESTOPPEL BY CONDUCT - PETITIONER'S PARTICIPATION IN INTERVIEW AND SECONDING ELECTION OF MANAGING COMMITTEE MEMBERS BARS CHALLENGE TO APPOINTMENT.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner, a teacher at Ashok Ucha Vidyalaya, challenged the appointment of respondent as the Head Master of the school by the ad hoc managing committee. Petitioner claimed that the committee was not duly constituted and that the appointment process was flawed. The ad hoc managing committee, in its counter-affidavit, asserted that the petitioner was estopped from challenging the appointment as he had participated in the interview and seconded the election of the committee members.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the petitioner was estopped from challenging the validity of the ad hoc committee's constitution and the appointment of the Head Master. The court reasoned that the petitioner's participation in the interview and seconding of the election of the committee members constituted acquiescence and acceptance of the committee's validity.

Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner had locus standi to challenge the appointment of the Head Master by the ad hoc managing committee. 2. Whether the petitioner's participation in the interview and seconding of the election of the committee members estopped him from challenging the committee's validity.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle of estoppel by conduct, as set forth in Section 115 of the Evidence Act, to hold that the petitioner was estopped from challenging the validity of the ad hoc committee's constitution and the appointment of the Head Master. The court reasoned that the petitioner's actions, in participating in the interview and seconding the election of the committee members, demonstrated his acceptance of the committee's validity and barred him from later challenging it.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petitioner's application, upholding the appointment of the Head Master by the ad hoc managing committee.

Judgment

1. This application by Jadunandan Puri under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated the 23rd February, 1974, as contained in Annexure 5, passed by the District Education Officer (respondent No. 2) approving the appointment of Surendra Deo Singh (respondent No. 7) as the Head Master of Ashok Ucha Vidyalaya at Daudnagar in the district of Aurangabad, as recommended by the ad hoc managing committee of the said school (respondents Nos. 4 to 6) by its resolution dated the 29th January, 1974 as contained in Annexure F to the counter-affidavit filed by respondents Nos. 4 to 7. In the application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the appointment of respondent No. 7, for direction to the authorities to take steps for appointment of a permanent Head Master afresh, in accordance with law, and for a further direction to respondent No. 3 (the Sub-divisional Education Officer) to take steps for expeditious reconstitution of the Managing Committee of the said school.

2. In order to appreciate the point involved in this application, it will be necessary to state briefly the facts, as stated by the petitioner in his writ application:-

His application relates to a non-Government recognised High School known as "Ashok Ucha Vidyalaya" at Daudnagar in the district, of Aurangabad. The managing committee of the aforesaid school was constituted on the 11th of May, 1973. An appeal was filed against the constitution of the above committee under Rule 40 of the Bihar High Schools (Constitution, Powers and Functions of Managing Committee) Rules 1964 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), before the President of the Board of Secondary Education (respondent No. 1) who set aside the constitution of the above managing committee, and directed reconstitution thereof within the maximum period of two months by his order dated the 7th November, 1973, as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition. By the said order the President of the Board had also directed that during the above period the Head Master of the School, the departmental representative as well as life members would continue to function as members of the Managing Committee. The petitioner further stated in his application that there was no life member in the said school. Respondent No. 3 unauthorisedly nominated respondents Nos. 5 and 6, in place of life members, who were merely donor members. Although, the President had directed the election of the new Managing Committee to be completed within two months, no election was held till the filing of the writ application by the petitioner in this Court. The ad hoc managing committee took steps for appointment of a permanent Head master for the said school by issuing advertisement for the same, which was published in the Searchlight dated the 15th January, 1974. A copy of the said publication is Annexure 2. According to the petitioner, the advertisement ought to have been published at least in two daily newspapers of Bihar, as per regulation and the rules framed under Sec. 8 (1) of the Bihar High Schools (Control and Regulation of Administration) Act, 1960. The petitioner has further stated in his application that he along with others made applications for appointment to the post of the Head master. He also stated that he had been officiating as Head master of the School continuously from the year 1971. He had also functioned in the said capacity in the year 1968 till October, 1969. He was in service in the said school from 1945 and had been Assistant Head master since 1955. The petitioner is an M. A. trained and he has till now put in over 28 years of service as teacher in various capacities in the said school.

He has further asserted in paragraph 9 of the application that respondents Nos. 5 and 6 held a farcical interview on the 29th January, 1974 and recommended the names of the following three persons in order of preference for appointment to the post of the Head Master of the said school





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top