The duty of the trial court to provide reasons for granting injunctions and the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

1. The back ground facts concisely are as follows:

1.(i) A Scheme Decree in O.S.No.234 of 1994 was passed by the Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai, as regards administration of A.V.C. College (Autonomous), situate in Mannampandal in Mayiladuthurai. Then and there the members have been filed execution applications before the said Court for specific reliefs and they are agitating their respective rights with respect to the administration. The relevant factors are that on 30.9.2008 the second petitioner was suspended from Membership with effect from 8. 2008 for a period of one year and 3rd petitioner was also suspended on 18. 2008 from the membership for a period of one year and the said suspensions are subject matter of challenge in E.A.No.18 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Thiruvarur filed by the first petitioner and E.A.No.24 of 2008 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai, filed by the third petitioner. W.P.Nos.20171 of 2008 and 20569 of 2008 filed by the second and third petitioners respectively were dismissed of by this Court on 29. 2008 directing the learned Sub-Judge, Thiruvaruru to dispose of the applications pending before him, within the time already stipulated.

1.(ii) The petitioners conducted A.V.C. Education Committee Meeting on 3. 2009 and the first petitioner became the Secretary of the Educational Committee. The said circumstances necessitated the filing of E.A.1 of 2009 in O.S.No.234 of 1994 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Mayiladuthurai, for administration of A.V.C. Education Committee seeking for interim injunction restraining the present petitioners herein from disturbing the functioning of the respondents herein as A.V.C. Education Committee members except under due process of law.

2. In the affidavit filed by the 1st respondent the following allegations are found:

2.(i) The petitioners (Respondents 1 and 2 herein) are acting as Secretary and Treasurer respectively in A.V.C. Education Committee, that out of 9 members in the said committee 6 vacancies are there, the petitioners and the college principal are the said committee members; that since the period of the first petitioner would end with 3. 2009, as per bye-law, 3 members are essential to convene the meeting and hence on 22. 2009 the petitioners convened meeting and the passed a resolution to the effect that the present committee members should continue till the filling up of six vacancies and in pursuance of which the petitioners are acting as such; that even though the first respondent (first petitioner herein) was suspended from Membership on 30.9.2008 who filed E.A.No.13 of 2008 challenging the meeting held on 5. 2008 and it was transmitted to Thiruvarur Sub-Court and re-numbered as E.A.18 of 2008 and the same is pending; that the second respondent (second petitioner herein) was also suspended for one year with effect from 8. 2008, likewise third respondent (third petitioner herein) was suspended for a period of one year from 18. 2008, that second and third respondents filed W.P.Nos.20171 of 2008 and 20569 of 2008, which was dismissed on 29. 2008 and there had been no appeal;

2.(ii) that E.A.No.24 of 2008 has been posted to 13. 2009; that the respondents have no right to convene the Education Committee Meeting; that on 13. 2009 a publication had been made by them stating that on 3. 2009 they convened a meeting in the college premises in which first respondent was elected as Committee Chairman, and the the earlier resolutions were set aside; that on 3. 2009 was holiday for the college and on that date no meeting was held and the said meeting is non-est; that the continuance of the respondents as members in the committee is not sustainable; that they are not entitled to disturb the administration by these petitioners and hence they have to be injuncted from interfering with the administration and management of the college by these petitioner and an interim injunction may be granted to that effect.