Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.K. Mishra for the respondent no. 4. This writ petition relates to the dispute of the office-bearers of the Committee of Management of Rambeti Vidya Samiti which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and manages an aided Junior High School of the same name.

The petitioner Jagdish Chandra Dixit claims himself to be the Manager of the said institution and he contends that the impugned order dated 3rd of May, 2012 which is in the shape of a correction of the earlier order dated 14th March, 2012 deserves to be set aside. By way of an amendment, the order passed by the Basic Education Officer on 17th July, 2012 has also been assailed which has upheld the claim of the respondent no. 4 and has rejected the claim of the petitioner.

The amendment application allowing the challenge raised to the order dated 17.7.2012 was implemented in terms of the order dated 9.8.2012 passed by this Court.

Sri S.K. Mishra has filed a short counter affidavit and a detailed counter affidavit on behalf of the respondent no. 4 which has been taken on record.

Sri Ashok Khare, submits that the order dated 17.7.2012 is in violation of principles of natural justice, inasmuch as, the said order proceeded as if one Mahipal Singh was the representative on behalf of the petitioner which fact is absolutely incorrect as there was no authorization on the part of the petitioner in favour of Mahipal Singh to represent his cause.

The second ground of the violation of principles of natural justice is that the Basic Education Officer has proceeded to pass the order on the strength of the report dated 1st of June, 2012, copy whereof was never supplied to the petitioner nor its contents were made known to him, hence, the impugned order is vitiated.

The third ground of challenge is that the order dated 3rd May, 2012 was a mala-fide order as it was passed on the very next day of the judgment of this Court dated 2.5.2012 in writ petition no. 20000 of 2012. He submits that the said order dated 3.5.2012 has been made the basis for passing of the order dated 17.7.2012 which could not have been done as the said order became non-existent with the quashing of the original order dated 14.3.2012 by this Court vide judgment dated 2.5.2012.

Sri Khare therefore submits that apart from other facts, the aforesaid three grounds are sufficient to set aside the impugned orders dated 3rd May, 2012 and 17.7.2012.

Replying to the aforesaid submissions, Sri Mishra submits that on merits, it is evident that the resolutions were validly passed under which the answering respondent no. 4 had been elected as the Manager and the constitution of his Committee was valid. Apart from this, the correction order dated 3rd of May, 2012 did not in any way alter the situation as it was a mere correction.

He further submits that Jagdish Chandra Dixit the petitioner had himself appeared before the Basic Education Officer and filed an application on 5th June, 2012 narrating his facts and he did not choose to challenge the report dated 1st of June, 2012. With the aid of paragraph 24 of the counter affidavit he also submits that the petitioner had knowledge of the report dated 1.6.2012.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and the learned Standing Counsel for the State Authorities, it appears that this dispute arose after allegations came forward that Hodil Singh the President of the Society, and Data Bax Singh the Manager of the Society had been removed. The Basic Education Officer passed the order on 14th March, 2012 recognizing the election of the respondent no. 4 held on 12.2.2012. This order of the Basic Education Officer was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 20000 of 2012. This Court vide judgment dated 2nd May, 2012 allowed the writ petition making observations with regard to the manner in which the Basic Education Officer had proceeded to accept the claim of the respondent and a