Back
2000 Supreme(All) 32
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Yatindra Singh, J.
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT RAJA TEJ SINGH VIDYALAYA AURANDH, MAINPURI - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOLS, MAINPURI - Respondents
C. M. W. P 50290 Of 1999
Decided On : 01/10/2000
Ashok Khare, K.Ajit, Satyal Pal Singh
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the prescribed authority under the Societies Registration Act has the statutory right to determine election disputes, and its decision will override the decisions of other authorities. The court also emphasized the importance of affording a reasonable opportunity to the parties before making administrative decisions.
Headnote:
Registrar Societies - Scope, Power, and Jurisdiction - Societies Registration Act, Section 25, Intermediate Education Act, First Statutes of Universities - The judgment discusses the powers and jurisdiction of the Registrar Societies and Chits funds, the Prescribed Authority under the Societies Registration Act, and the Basic Shiksha adhikari in respect of Societies running Junior High Schools. It also addresses the anomaly between the Societies Registration Act, the Intermediate Education Act, and the first statutes of different Universities under the U. P. State University Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involves a dispute over the recognition of the Committee of Management of a society running a Junior High School. Elections were held, resulting in conflicting claims by different factions. The Basic Shiksha Adhikari recognized one faction, while the Assistant Registrar recognized another. The dispute was referred to the court to determine the validity of the elections and the recognition of the Committee of Management.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Assistant Registrar had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute and quashed the order. The court directed the Assistant Registrar to refer the dispute to the prescribed authority, which has the statutory right to determine the election dispute. The court also found that the order for single operation of accounts by the Basic Shiksha Adhikari was illegal and quashed it.
Issues: The issues included the jurisdiction of the Registrar and the prescribed authority under the Societies Registration Act, the source of power of the Basic Shiksha Adhikari in recognizing the Committee of Management, the nature of the dispute before the Assistant Registrar, the reasonable opportunity given to the parties, and the legality of the order for single operation of accounts.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prescribed authority has jurisdiction to decide election disputes and that the Assistant Registrar had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute. The court also found that the order for single operation of accounts was illegal as it was passed without affording a reasonable opportunity to the Committee of Management.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions, quashed the orders of the Assistant Registrar and the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, and directed the Assistant Registrar to refer the dispute to the prescribed authority. The court also directed the Basic Shiksha Adhikari to abide by the order of the prescribed authority.
( 1 ) THIS decision examines the scope, power, and jurisdiction of the Registrar Societies and Chits funds, the Prescribed Authority under the Societies Registration Act, and the Basic Shiksha adhikari in respect of Societies running Junior High Schools. Among these, in a controversy to decide about the recognition of its Committee of Management, whose decision will override the other? How should the different provisions, relating this controversy, be reconciled? in addition, it is recommended that the State may remove the anomaly between the Societies Registration act, the Intermediate Education Act, and the first statutes of different Universities under the U. P. State University Act (heading remarks : Section 25 of the Societies Registration Act. Section 16a (7) of the Intermediate Education Act. and the First Statutes of the Universities paragraphs 30-37 ). Here are the facts. FACTS
( 2 ) THERE is a society known as Raja Tej Singh Vidyalaya Aurandh. district Mainpuri (the RTS society ). It runs a Junior High School by the same name (the RTS school ). The governing body (Committee of Management) of the RTS society also manages the RTS school, i. e. , Committee of Management of the RTS society is the Committee of Management in the RTS School. There is only one election. (Reference to the Committee of Management of the governing body of the rts society or election thereto means the Committee of Management of the RTS School or election thereto and vice versa in this Judgment ).
( 3 ) ADMITTED elections to the Committee of Management of the RTS society were held on 19th november, 1995. In this election one Sri Awadh Kishore and Sri Ravendra Singh were elected as the President and the Manager of the Society. Every year, a society is required to submit a list of members of the governing body under Section 4 of the Societies Registration Act. Sri Ravendra singh submitted a list some time in November. 1998. In this list instead of Sri Awadh Kishore, some one else was shown as the President. The Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, agra (the AR) issued notices to Sri Awadh Kishore to confirm it. In the meantime, fresh elections were held. There was dispute among the members :
(i) one faction held his election on 3rd December, 1998 electing Sri Lallu Singh as the Manager ; (ii) second faction held election on 6th December, 1998 electing Sri Satya Pal Singh as the manager ; (iii) third faction also held election in which Sri K. K. Singh was elected as Manager. Sri K. K. Singh is no longer in picture and has gone out of contest. Different sets of persons were allegedly elected as office bearers and members of Committee of management in these elections. All submitted their papers to the AR under Section 4 of the societies Registration Act for information as well as to the Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Mainpuri (the BSA) for their recognition.
( 4 ) THE BSA by his order dated 20th January, 1999 recognised Sri Satya Pal Singh as the manager. Sri Lallu Singh filed a Writ Petition No. 5611 of 1999 (the earlier writ petition) against the order of the BSA dated 20. 1. 1999. This writ petition was allowed on 24. 2. 1999 (the earlier order of the High Court] and the BSA was directed to decide the controversy again within 15 days from the production of a certified copy of the order. The BSA has again recognised Sri satya Pal Singh as the Manager by his order dated 5th April. 1999. Sri Lallu Singh has again filed a Writ Petition No. 20017 of 1999 (the first writ petition) against the order of the BSA dated 5. 4. 1999. No interim orders were granted in this writ petition.
( 5 ) DURING pendency of the first writ petition, the BSA passed another order dated 23rd October, 1999 for single operation of the accounts under 2nd proviso to the U. P. Junior High School (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1978 (the Payment of Salary Act ). It is on, the basis of some letter of the Joint Director of Education (Bas
