The court emphasized the importance of allowing the petitioners to file objections against the findings of the enquiry committee and raise other pleas and contentions in the ongoing proceedings under Section 16-D.

Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

1. The petitioner committee of management of a recognised institution in the name of Shri Gyan Chandra Jain Vaidya Inter College, Ikdil, Etawah has approached this Court assailing the validity of a notice issued by the sixth respondent, whereby the second petitioner was called upon to appear in his office on 31.5.2016 in connection with an enquiry, which was being held in relation to the charge of misappropriation and misuse of a sum of Rs.92,86,200/- awarded as compensation to the institution for acquisition of some part of its land.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the State Government initiated proceedings against the petitioner committee of management for its super-session under Section 16-D of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. It passed an order on 1.3.2016 in purported exercise of power under Section 16-D (8) of the Act superseding the management for a period of six months. The aforesaid order was subjected to challenge by the petitioners in Writ-C No.11230 of 2016. The writ petition was allowed by this Court by order dated 10.3.2016 being of the opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the case, there was no justification on part of the State Government to have recourse to the power under sub-section (8) of Section 16-D. However, it was left open to the respondents to pass final orders under sub-section (6) of Section 16-D. The State Government again by order dated 2.5.2016 superseded the management by taking recourse to the power under sub-section (8) of Section 16-D. The aforesaid order was again subjected to challenge by the petitioners by filing Writ-C No.21335 of 2016. Again this Court by an order dated 10.5.2016 allowed the writ petition and quashed the order dated 2.5.2016. It was clarified that the State Government will be at liberty to pass final orders under Section 16-D (6) of the Act after supplying the requisite documents to the petitioners. In the meantime, the interim arrangement, which was made by this Court by order dated 10.3.2016 while disposing of Writ-C No.11230 of 2016, was directed to remain in force. The operative part of the order of this Court dated 10.5.2016 is to the following effect: -

"Accordingly and in view of the statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General for the State-respondents, the impugned order dated 2 May 2016 is quashed. The writ petition is allowed. The matter is remitted back to the State Government with liberty to pass final orders under section 16-D(6) of the Act after supplying the copies of the comments of the District Inspector of Schools and the Joint Director of Education or such other enquiry report on which reliance is likely to be placed. Such exercise be carried out by the State Government expeditiously, in accordance with law. Until the final orders are passed, the arrangement which was made by this Court while passing the order dated 10 March 2016 in Writ-C No.11230 of 2016, shall continue."

3. Thereafter, while the proceedings remained pending before the State Government, the District Inspector of Schools lodged a first information report against the second petitioner under Section 409 IPC. It was challenged by the petitioners by filing Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.12623 of 2016 primarily on the ground that lodging of the F.I.R. against the petitioners was an outcome of political vendetta. This Court, being prima facie satisfied with the contention of the petitioners, stayed their arrest by order dated 30.5.2016. It seems that thereafter the Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur by order dated 24.5.2016 constituted a three member committee for holding an enquiry into the allegation of misappropriation of the compensation amount awarded to the institution in lieu of acquisition of part of its land. The sixth respondent, who is one of the member of the said enquiry committee, issued notice to the petitioners calling upon them to appear in his office on 31.5.2016 in connection with the said enquiry alon