Back
M. K. MUKHERJEE, R. A. SHARMA
Committee of Management, Audyogik Vikas Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Samiti – Appellant
Versus
Prescribed Authority, Basti – Respondent
What is the effect of having separate Committees of Management under the Act and under the Scheme of Administration on their tenure and validity? How to resolve disputes regarding appointments to the Committee of Management when there are overlapping terms under different statutory frameworks? What are the consequences of the expiry of the College Committee of Management on the Society Committee of Management’s validity and functions?
Key Points: - (!) The dispute concerned renewal of registration of the Society and the termination/validity of appointments to the Committee of Management. - (!) Appellants argued that Society’s Committee and College’s Scheme Committee are distinct with separate terms; Society committee has five-year minimum life vs. College committee three years and three months. - (!) It is acknowledged that Society and College Committees have separate statutory identities and duties under different statutes/schemes. - (!) In this case, both Committees were the same body; thus expiry of the College committee's term meant the Society committee also outlived its purpose. - (!) The Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it. - (!) Appeal dismissed.
M. K Mukerjee, C.J.
1. In the town; of Maharajganj within the district of Basti there is a registered society named and styled as Audyogik Vikas Uchchtar Madhyamik Vidyalaya Samiti which runs a college under the name and style of Audyogik Vikas Inter College. In May, 1956 both Siyaram Singh, the appellant no. 2, and Ambika Prasad Singh, the respondent no. 3 herein, set up rival claims as Secretary-cum-Manager of the society contending that they had been so appointed in the meetings of the Society held on May 18, and May 25, 1986 respectively and each of them requested the Assistant Registrar of Societies for renewal of registration of the Society in his favour. The said Registrar referred the dispute to the Prescribed Authority (Sub-Divisional Magistrate), Harriya to decide the matter in accordance with section 25 (1) of the Societies Registration Act, 1860. ('Act' for short), and the latter decided the dispute in favour of the appellant no. ? by an order dated 18 9-1990 Assailing that order the respondent no. 3 filed a writ petition before a learned Judge of this Court which was allowed and the order of the Prescribed Authority was set aside principally on the ground that
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
