A Manager of a Committee of Management cannot initiate a writ petition without prior authorization from the Committee, thus impacting the maintainability of such petitions.

ORDER :

SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.

1. In the present case, contesting private respondent has raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of present writ petition in it’s present form that it is not accompanied with a resolution of the Committee of Management to challenge the impugned order and to further authorise it’s Manager to act on their behalf.

2. The present writ petition is filed by the Committee of Management of a College namely, Sri Gandhi Inter College, Harpur Budhat, Gorakhpur being Petitioner No. 1 through its Manager being Petitioner No. 2. against an order dated 24.12.2025 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Gorakhpur, whereby a proposal dated 26.10.2025 to suspend Respondent No. 3 has been turned down.

3. Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Avneesh Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioners, has submitted that there is a Scheme of Administration to run various affairs of the College through Committee of Management, which also provides responsibility and powers of each Office Bearer. The Manager of Committee of Management has wide powers and responsibilities including being authorized to sign pleadings etc. on its behalf. For reference relevant clause of Scheme of Administration is mentioned here in after:-

4. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that said Scheme of Administration has incorporated all clauses of model Scheme of Administration provided under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 as well as various other clauses and it was approved also.

5. Learned Senior Advocate has referred a resolution dated 13.01.2026 (adopted subsequent to filing of present writ petition) in a meeting of the Committee of management to authorise it’s Manager to sign pleadings on behalf of it, in terms of above referred clause as an abundant caution to meet the preliminary objection, despite it was not required.

6. Learned Senior Advocate has not disputed a settled position of law that a Manager of the Committee of Management, in sole capacity, cannot file a writ petition and it is always the Committee of Management who could file a writ petition, if aggrieved by any action of State-Respondent, through it’s Manager.

7. According to learned Senior Advocate above referred Clauses 20 (3) (9) of Scheme of Administration completely authorise the Manager to take a decision so as to challenge an order passed by State- Respondent or by any other authority, before a Competent Court and for that there is no mandatory requirement to adopt a fresh resolution by the Committee of Management to the effect whether a proceeding is required to be instituted before a Competent Court and the Manager being authorised to plead on it’s behalf, can take a decision on his own for institution of such cases.

8. Per contra, Sri R.C. Dwivedi, learned counsel for Private Respondent-3 has referred judgments passed in the cases of Saraswati Vidya Mandir Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh , 2003 (3) AWC 1917 ; C/M Junior High School Sayar Vs. State of U.P. and 2 Ors , 2019:AHC:19863; Umesh Chandra and Anr. Vs. Mahila Vidyalaya Society, Aminabad, Lucknow and Ors. , 2006(24) LCD 1373 that it is Committee of Management who could only be aggrieved by any act of State- Respondent and not it’s Manager independently, therefore, a decision to institute a challenge to it, could only be taken by the Committee of Management and not by it’s Manager alone. The referred clause of Scheme of Administration authorise the Manager to act on behalf of the Committee of Management, to plead pleadings and to represent before Court or forum, as the case may be, and does not authorise t