By the Court.—The main question involved in this special appeal is, whether the procedure of elections of committee of management of the DAV Intermediate College, Meerpur, District Allahabad (the College) prescribed in the bye-laws of the Aryan Educational Trust (the Society) is in conflict with the scheme of administration of the College.

THE FACTS

2. The Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act. At present, it runs three institutions namely, a Music School, a Junior High School, and the College. It’s bye-laws provide not only regarding the elections of the executive committee of the Society but also of the committees of management of different institutions run by it.

3. In the bye-laws of the Society, the procedure prescribed for the elections of the committees of management is a kind of indirect election. The members of the Society elect 25 member executive committee of the Society. This executive committee elects the committees of management of different institutions among themselves.

4. The undisputed election of the committee of management of the College was held on 28.10.2007 in accordance with the procedure provided in the bye-laws of the Society. In this elections, Sri Virendra Kumar Srivastava (the Appellant) was elected as the Manager of the college.

5. According to the Appellant, the next election of the committee of management was hold on 23.10.2010 in which the Appellant was again elected the Manager. The papers were also sent to the District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad (the DIOS) on 28.10.2010 for granting recognition.

6. According to Sri Pankaj Jaiswal (the contesting respondent), the elections were held on 14.2.2010 in which he was elected the Manager of the College. He also sent papers to the Assistant Registrar as well as to the DIOS to recognise his elections.

7. It appears that some inquiry was conducted and a report dated 13.5.2010 was submitted that the elections were not held according to the scheme of administration applicable to the College. On the basis of this report, an order was passed by the State Government on 22.6.2010 superseding the committee of management of the College.

8. The Appellant filed writ petition No. 37372 of 2010 against the aforesaid order of the State Government. It was allowed on 10.12.2010 on the ground that the State Government had no power to supersede the committee of management.

9. Thereafter, the DIOS passed two orders on 4.1.2011:

? By order number 22836, the dispute regarding the committee of management was referred to the Regional Level Committee, Allahabad (the RLC); and

? By the order number 22837, the single operation of the account was ordered.

10. The Appellant filed writ petition No. 2324 of 2011 against the order of single operation of the accounts of the College (order number 22837 dated 4.1.2011). In this writ petition, an interim order was passed on 17.1.2011. Subsequently, the order of single operation was withdrawn on 5.2.2011. Thereafter, the writ petition No. 2324 of 2011 was dismissed as infructuous on 12.7.2011.

11. The RLC by order dated 3.4.2011 did not recognise either of the elections. The elections of the Appellants were not accepted on the ground that:

? The scheme of administration overrides the bye-laws of the Society;

? The election contemplated in the scheme of administration is by members of the Society and not by the executing committee of the Society as provided in the bye-laws of the society;

? The elections have been conducted according to the bye-laws of the Society but not according to the scheme of administration.

12. On the basis of the aforesaid findings, the RLC directed:

? The DIOS to hold the elections within two months; and

? The Associate District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad, (the ADIOS) to manage the College in the meantime. However, he was neither supposed to take any policy decision nor transfer the property of the College.

13. Against the aforesaid order of the RLC, the Appellant filed writ