Partly allowed

C/M of the Kuravli Higher Secondary Association and 76 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 May 2018WRIC/14325/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order recognising an election because the District Inspector of Schools failed to consider objections filed by the petitioners before passing the order. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 13.4.2018 quashed; matter remitted to District Inspector of Schools for fresh consideration within four weeks.

C/M of the Kuravli Higher Secondary Association and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 14325 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M Of The Kuravli Higher Secondary Association And 76 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi,Samarath Singh,Sankalp Narain Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rakesh Ojha

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

The instant petition has been filed praying for quashing of the orders dated 27.3.2018 and 13.4.2018 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri, as well as the election proceedings dated 11.4.2018. By order dated 27.3.2018, the District Inspector of Schools finalised the Electoral College in pursuance of an order dated 16.1.2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 54351 of 2017. By order dated 13.4.2018, the Committee, the fourth respondent, elected on 11.4.2018 has been recognised and signatures of Ramveer Singh Rana were attested as Manager.

¶6

The petitioners claim that they filed objections dated 11.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 disputing the validity of the election proceedings dated 11.4.2018. However, without according consideration to those objections, the District Inspector of Schools proceeded to recognise the election dated 11.4.2018 by order dated 13.4.2018.

¶7

On 25.4.2018, the following order was passed : -

¶8

"It is urged that despite objections dated 11.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 having been filed before the District Inspector of Schools disputing the election dated 11.4.2018, he proceeded to recognise the said election without adverting to the objections.

¶9

Learned standing counsel seeks time to ascertain whether the objections were received by the District Inspector of Schools or not.

¶10

As prayed, put up as fresh on 2.5.2018."

¶11

Today, when the matter is taken up, learned standing counsel on instructions, admits that the objections dated 11.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 were duly received in the office of District Inspector of Schools, before the impugned order was passed.

¶12

From the statement made by learned standing counsel, it is evident

¶13

that on the date the election was recognised by District Inspector of Schools by order dated 13.4.2018, the objections filed by the petitioners were very much before the District Inspector of Schools. However, without according consideration to the same, he mechanically proceeded to recognise the election.

¶14

Sri Anil Bhushan, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the fourth respondent very fairly submitted that the matter be remitted back to the third respondent for according consideration to the objections filed by the petitioners, to which learned counsel for the petitioners also agreed to.

¶15

Accordingly, the impugned order dated 13.4.2018 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Mainpuri is quashed. The matter is remitted back to the third respondent for according fresh consideration to the election dated 11.4.2018 in the light of the objections filed by the petitioners dated 11.4.2018 and 12.4.2018. It goes without saying that in case, the District Inspector of Schools faces legal impediment or difficulty in according approval to the election, it shall be open to him to refer the matter to the Regional Level Committee, as provided under Government Order dated 20.10.2008.

¶16

Exercise in this regard shall be carried out by the District Inspector of Schools within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶17

The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.

¶18

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 9.5.2018 AM/-

C/M of the Kuravli Higher Secondary Association and 76 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M of the Kuravli Higher Secondary Association and 76 Others v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nikhil Kumar Chaturvedi Vs Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University and 2 Others

Committee of Management Ashok Gangwar Memorial Inter College, Tahpur, Kannauj and Another Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Ashutosh Shukla Vs Veer Bahadur Singh Purvanchal Vishwavidyalaya and 2 Others

Mahaveer Nursing and Paramedical College and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kasturi College of Education and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Katyayani College of Education and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others