Remanded

C/M Sarswati Vidya Mandir Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Apr 2018WRIC/9788/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition dismissed, directing the District Inspector of Schools to pass a speaking order clarifying whether the Dissolution Committee can control the institution's affairs after hearing both parties.

What did the court decide?

Directing the third respondent to pass a speaking order on the controversy after hearing the petitioners and respondent no.5 within four weeks.

C/M Sarswati Vidya Mandir Inter College and Another… — Company and Corporate | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 19

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 9788 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M Sarswati Vidya Mandir Inter College And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shivendu Ojha,R. K. Ojha,Radha Kant Ojha,Shatrughan Sonwal,Sri Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Advocate) Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pashupati Nath Tripathi

¶4

Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,J.

¶5

The instant petition has been filed seeking quashing of order dated 2.2.2018 passed by Branch Manager, Allahabad Bank, Allahabad, respondent no.4, whereby he informed the petitioner Committee of Management that although it had been operating the accounts of the institution so far, but the bank is in receipt of an order dated 18.12.2017 from the Administrative Unit of Bhartiya Shiksha Samiti, Uttar Pradesh, dissolving the petitioner Committee of Management and constituting a new adhoc Committee for operating the accounts of the Institution. It has also been observed in the said communication that the bank does not have power to decide as to who is entitled to operate the accounts, in such a situation. Accordingly, the petitioner Committee of Management has been directed to obtain clarification in this regard from the Joint Director of Education or the District Inspector of Schools to facilitate smooth operation of the accounts.

¶6

The petitioner claims itself to be the Committee of Management of Saraswati Vidya Mandir, Inter College, Hamirpur, a recognised institution under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The institution is being run by a registered Society in the name of Saraswati Shiksha Parishad. It is not in dispute between the parties that pursuant to various interim orders passed from time to time in favour of the petitioner Committee of Management, it had been operating the accounts of the institution.

¶7

According to Sri R. K. Ojha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Bhartiya Shiksha Samiti, Uttar Pradesh is a separate society different from the society which is running the institution. It has no business to interfere with the affairs of the petitioner institution. In this regard reliance has been heavily placed on the provisions of the Scheme of Administration in contending that it is a Committee which is elected in accordance with the approved Scheme of Administration, which is entitled to operate the accounts of the institution and not any other committee, nor the one which has been constituted by the fifth respondent by order dated

¶8

18.12.2017.

¶9

Having regard to these submissions, this Court at the time writ petition was entertained, passed a detailed order on 16.3.2018 directing the learned standing counsel to clarify as to whether under the approved Scheme of Administration, the fifth respondent would have any authority to control the affairs of the institution.

¶10

A counter affidavit has been filed by the Finance and Account Officer in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Hamirpur. Learned standing counsel admits that in the said counter affidavit, there is no clear cut reply to the query posed by this Court. He submitted that the District Inspector of Schools be granted liberty to clarify the position in this regard in the context of the doubt expressed by the bank, after hearing both the parties, to which learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri V.K. Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.5 also do not have any objection.

¶11

Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of by directing the third respondent to pass a speaking order on the controversy after hearing the petitioners as well as respondent no.5, within a period of four weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶12

Sri R.K. Ojha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners and Sri V. K. Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.5 submitted that the parties would appear before respondent no.3 on 30 April 2018 with a certified copy of this order and documentary evidence on which they are placing reliance upon. The District Inspector of Schools shall fix a date after three weeks and decide the matter by issuing necessary clarification to the bank by passing a speaking order within two weeks thereafter.

¶13

Order Date :- 26.4.2018

¶14

skv

¶15

(Manoj Kumar Gupta, J.)

C/M Sarswati Vidya Mandir Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C/M Sarswati Vidya Mandir Inter College and Another 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

Dilip Saraswat and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Kashif Raza Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

C/M Adarsh Rashtriya Vidyalaya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Habibur Rehman Vs Chairman U.P. Power Corp Ltd. and Others

Km. Anushka Maheshwari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Madarsa College of Islamic (Arabic Madarsa) Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others