The main legal point established is that the exercise of ex-propriatory power must be strictly in accordance with the law and for the purpose for which the power is vested. Misuse of power can lead to orders being deemed arbitrary and illegal.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel.

2. The present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.02.2023, whereby the Authorized Controller was appointed in purported exercise of power under Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and other Employees) Act, 1971 (in short 'the 1971 Act') as well as the order dated 09.08.2023, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected.

3. The contention of the Counsel for the petitioners in brief is that an order came to be passed appointing the Authorized Controller over the instructions vide order dated 13.02.2023 as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition. On perusal of the said order, it is revealed that the said order has been passed observing that in a report dated 17.01.2023, grave financial irregularity were observed and in exercise of powers under Section 4(1) and Section 6(1) of the 1971 Act, recommendation was made for appointment of Authorized Controller and based upon the said report and the recommendation, the Authorized Controller was appointed.

4. The petitioners had initially preferred an appeal against the order dated 13.02.2023 which was rejected. Aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ-C No.3977 of 2023, which was decided on 17.05.2023. In terms of the said order, the appellate order dated 19.04.2023 dismissing the appeal was set aside and the matter was remanded for decision afresh. In the light of the said remedy, the impugned order came to be passed dismissing the appeal on 24.07.2023.

5. The net contention of the Counsel for the petitioners is that assuming the report dated 17.01.2023, to be a gospel truth, no power vests, either under Section 4(1) or under Section 6(1) of the 1971 Act, to recommend the appointment of an Authorized Controller as there is no allegation with regard to any irregularity or non-payment of salary. He argues that the 1971 Act was enacted to regulate the payment of salary to teachers and other employees of the High Schools and Intermediate Colleges receiving aid out of the State fund and to provide for matters connected therewith. He draws my attention to Section 4(1) of the 1971 Act, which is as under:

"4. Power to inspect etc. -(1) The Inspector may at any time, for the purposes of this Act, inspect or cause to be inspected any institution or call for such information and records (including registers, book of account and vouchers) from its management with regard to the payment of salaries to its teachers or employees or give to its management any direction for the observance of such cannons of financial propriety (including any direction for retrenchment of any teacher or employee or for prohibition of any wasteful expenditure) as he thinks fit."

6. The object of the Act, Sections 5 and 6 which are relevant are as under:

“Purpose/ Object of the Act

An Act to regulate the payment of salaries to teachers and other employees of High Schools and Intermediate Colleges receiving aid out of the State funds and to provide for matters connected therewith.

"5. Procedure for payment of salary in the case of certain institutions. -(1) The management of every institution shall, for the purpose of disbursement of salaries to its teachers and employees, open [in a Scheduled Bank or a Cooperative Bank] a separate account to be opened jointly by a representative of the management and by the Inspector or such other officer as may be authorised by the Inspector in that behalf:

Provided that after the account is opened, the Inspector may, if he is, subject to any rules made under this Act, satisfied that it is expedient in the public interest so to do, instruct the bank that the account shall be operated by the representative as the management alone, and may at any time revoke such instruction:

Provided further that in the case referred to in the provision to subsection (2), or where