Allowed

C/M B.R.P Inter College and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2019WRIC/21633/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court quashed an order appointing a controller for a college during election disputes. The Court held the order violated natural justice due to lack of hearing and directed the Regional Level Committee to decide the matter after hearing parties.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 15.06.2019 passed by the Joint Director of Education is quashed. The Regional Level Committee is directed to decide the controversy within one month after hearing all parties.

C/M B.R.P Inter College and Another Vs State of… — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 7

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 21633 of 2019

¶3

Petitioner :- C/M B.R.P Inter College And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sankalp Narain,Shri G.K. Singh (Senior Advocate)

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Ratnakar Upadhyay

¶5

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶6

Proceedings, before the Regional Level Committee, to determine the validity of the rival election claims set up by the parties are pending. In the meantime, the Joint Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi passed an order on 15.06.2019, appointing an authorized controller to manage the affairs of the institution.

¶7

The order dated 15.06.2019 is assailed in the instant writ petition.

¶8

Sri G.K.Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the order dated 15.06.2019 has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice.

¶9

The elections were held by the outgoing committee of management after obtaining permission from the District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi. The District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi illegally recalled permission, without putting the petitioner the petitioners to notice.

¶10

Sri R.K.Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ratnakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 in his usual fairness does not contest the fact, that no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners before the order impugned was passed.

¶11

Learned Standing Counsel on the basis of records also could not refute the fact that the order dated 15.06.2019 was passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

¶12

Suffice to say that the order dated 15.06.2019 visits the petitioners with penal consequences.

¶13

In view of the submissions advanced by the parties, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the petition pending.

¶14

This Court finds that the order dated 15.06.2019 has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. Further,

¶15

prejudice caused to the petitioners is beyond recall, inasmuch as, they claim to have conducted the elections after obtaining permission from the District Inspector of Schools, Varanasi. The elections were conducted by the outgoing committee of management which was duly recognized.

¶16

In such view of the matter, the order dated 15.06.2019 is arbitrary, illegal and cannot stand.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the rival parties, Sri G.K.Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.K.Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ratnakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent No.4 agree that both the writ petitions should be decided by a common order.

¶18

With consent of parties, both the writ petitions namely, Writ-C No.-21633 of 2019 and Writ-C No.and Writ-C No.-11693 of 2019 are being decided together by a common order.

¶19

With the consent of Sri G.K.Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.K.Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ratnakar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondent No.4, the following directions are being passed:

¶20

I. The order dated 15.06.2019 passed by the respondent No.2Joint Director of Education, Varanasi Region, Varanasi is quashed.

¶21

II. The Regional Level Committee shall decide the controversy within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order after affording an opportunity of hearing to all necessary parties.

¶22

III. The petitioner as well as Sri Harishchandra Srivastava claiming to be represented the society shall appear before the Regional Level Committee on 17.07.2019.

¶23

IV. The parties shall exchange their respective pleadings and relied on documents before the Regional Level Committee on 17.07.2019. In the meantime, the Regional Level Committee shall notice other necessary parties as it deems fit.

¶24

V. The Regional Level Committee shall make endorsement of service of all pleadings and relevant documents, being relied upon by the parties, upon their respective adversaries.

¶25

VI. The parties shall be heard by the Regional Level Committee

¶26

on 27.07.2019. The Regional Level Committee shall thereafter pass an order within a period of 10 days thereafter.

¶27

VII. The time-line shall be strictly adhered to by the Regional Level Committee since uncertainty in the affairs of the committee of management cannot be permitted to persist for long.

¶28

VIII. The single operation of the account shall continue till the decision is taken by the Regional Level Committee.

¶29

IX. Both the parties undertake to cooperate in the proceedings before the Regional Level Committee and shall not seek any adjournment.

¶30

This Court has not gone into the veracity of the assertions made in the writ petition nor has the claim of the petitioners been judged on merits. It is for the competent authority to do so after independent application of mind.

¶31

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition is finally disposed off.

¶32

Order Date :- 8.7.2019 Ashish Tripathi

C/M B.R.P 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 B.R.P 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Pradeep Jain Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Badshah Singh Vs the State of U.P. and 3 Others

C/M B.R.P. Inter College Jaunpur and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Niyz Mohd Alias Niaz Mohd Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Vikas Minor Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others