An election held with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools, even if it is held a few days after the expiry of the prescribed period, is valid. The approval of the District Inspector of Schools allows the Committee of Management to conclude the election and declare the result, without requiring it to function as a Committee of Management after the expiry of its life. The delay of a few days is insignificant and should be ignored for practical purposes.

The order dated 3-4-1995 passed by the Regional Deputy Director of Education, Vth Region, Varanasi, which is Annexure 5 to the writ petition is under challenge. Mr. Sankatha Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that the election had taken place on 21st July, 1991. Therefore, the subsequent election which was held on 24th August, 1994 and the result whereof was declared on 25th August, 1994 is invalid and the Committee so elected cannot be allowed to continue and recognised in view of the provisions contained in the Regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. In support of his contention, he relies on various decisions to which reference would be made shortly hereafter.

2. Mr. Sahi, learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, contends that there is no dispute about the legal proposition that an election is to be held within three years and one month. But in the facts and circumstances of the case where the election process had started within the prescribed period with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools but the ultimate election having been held three days after the expiry of the period of three years one month does not attract the penal consequences or invalidate when the said election has been held with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools. He hat referred to various portions of the impugned order and had translated the same at the Bar had pointed out that even the petitioners had admitted, as has been observed in the said order, that the petitioners had no effective control.

3. In the order itself, the entire question has been go tie into and it has been specified that with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools, the election process had started within the prescribed period and the same held on 24th August, 1995 and the result was declared on 25th August, 1 994 with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools. According to Mr. Sahi, the cases cited by Mr. Rid does not specify as to what would be the effect where such election had been held with the approval of the District Inspector of Schools when the election process had started before the expiry of the prescribed period and 3/4 days. Therefore, all the said cases are distinguishable.

4. Mr. Sankatha Rai, learned counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand, contends that in view of the specific provision, the election is to be held within the period before its expiry. Even if the election process had started within the period but the same cannot render the election valid when the same has been held after the expiry of the said period, may be within 3/4 days after such expiry. According to him, there is no provision authorising the District Inspector of Schools to approve such date of election. His authorisation cannot cure the specific legal provision provided in law. Therefore, according to him, the judgment cited by him applies in full force.

5. In the case of Committee of Management Brig. Hoshiar Singh Memorial Inter College, Shamli v. Deputy Director of Education, 1st Region, (1995) 1 UPLBEC 149 and (1994) 3 UPLBEC 1728, cited by Sri Sankatha Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner, Honble Mr. Justice R. A. Sharma while delivering the judgment in the Division Bench, had held that the election held after the expiry of three and one month from the date of election is wholly illegal. In the said case the earlier election took place on 27-7-1981. Admittedly three years and one month expired on 27-8-1989, whereas the election had taken place on 5-3-1990. In the case of M. M. I. Inter College Nehtour Bijnor v. Deputy Director of Educa tion, 10th Circle Moradabad, 1995 ACJ 132, Honble Mr. Justice R. A. Sharma, speaking for the Division Bench relying on the decision of another Division Bench in Ram Kripal Singh v. Committee of Management, 1993 (4) UPLBEC 341, held that election held on 16-10-1991 when the term of the Committee of management had ended in 1990 after be