Allahabad High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:187343 1 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12775 of 2023 Petitioner :- C/M Jain Inter College And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Nipun Singh,Pragyanshu Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Abhishek Mishra,Rahul Mishra Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. Heard Shri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4 and Shri Rahul Mishra for Caveator-Munendra Jain who, though is not a party to the writ petition, has been heard in exercise of powers under Chapter XXII, Rule 5-A of the Allahabad High Court Rules-1952. 2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 14.02.2023 whereby the District Inspector of Schools, Baghpat has directed single hand operation of the accounts of the Jain Inter College, Khekda, Baghpat in purported exercise of powers under Section 3(3) of the Uttar Pradesh High Schools And Intermediate College (Payment Of Salaries To Teachers And Other Employees) Act-1971 (in short 'the Act-1971'). 3. The order impugned recites that since the term of the elected Committee of Management has expired on 15.01.2023, as complained by the Caveator-Munendra Jain, the Committee of Management has become defunct/time barred and, therefore, permission to operate accounts by single hand arrangement is being ordered, for which purpose, Finance & Accounts Officer, Baghpat has been authorized.
Legal Reasoning
concerned, there is already an intervention made by this Court in terms of final order dated 16.03.2023 passed in Writ C No.38608 of 2022 (C/M Jain Inter College Through Its Manager v. State of U.P. And 4 Others). It is alleged that the directions contained in the aforesaid order dated 16.03.2023 for finalization of the electoral college and holding of elections, have not yet been complied with and the Deputy Registrar is seized up with the matter. 10. Insofar as the violation of principles of natural justice or locus of the caveator to persuade the District Inspector of Schools to pass order impugned is concerned, when facts are admitted, in every case, it is not necessary to observe adherence of principles of natural justice which is not a straight-jacket formula. Complaint or no complaint by the caveator is wholly insignificant in view of the record of proceedings of Writ C No.38608 of 2022 (C/M Jain Inter College Through Its Manager v. State of U.P. And 4 Others), as described in the order dated 16.03.2023 and admission before this Court to the effect that term has expired. 11. Shri Nipun Singh, by placing reliance upon un-amended provisions of Scheme of Administration, still argues that the term would continue only when next Body comes into charge pursuant to fresh elections, however, the Court cannot ignore the first part of amended Clause-7 of the Scheme of Administration, as already described hereinabove. 6 12. There being no controversy with regard to appointment of Authorized Controller, considering the fact that while addressing copy of the order impugned to various Authorities, status of the petitioner has been described as " पूव ्ቚबं(cid:13)क", while declining to interfere in the order impugned dated 14.02.2023 and refusing to set aside the same, it is clarified that the order impugned would remain confined to operate the accounts by single hand arrangement and for no other purpose. 13.
Arguments
4. While assailing the order impugned, Shri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the concerned Institution being a minority institution, the order impugned is in teeth of provisions of Section 16-D (14) of the U.P. Intermediate College Act-1921 (in short 'the Act-1921') which clearly provides that provisions of sub-sections (3) to (13) of Section 16-D will not apply to the minority institutions. He further submits that as 2 per the Scheme of Administration of the Committee of Management, Clause-7 clearly prescribes that the office bearers and members, other than Ex-officio members, shall hold their posts till next elections are held in the fourth year and the results are declared. He further submits that though the Scheme of Administration was amended later on, and the earlier term of the Committee of Management, i.e. three years was extended for a period of five years, the amendment that was incorporated is void, inasmuch as, the amended provision providing appointment of Authorized Controller after expiry of the term of the Committee, is contrary to the Statute, particularly, Section 16-D (14) of the Act-1921, as referred to hereinabove. He further submits that before passing the order impugned, no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners and it has been passed merely on a complaint moved by the alleged life member. He further submits that none of the contingencies provided under Section 6(3) of the Act-1971 existed and, therefore, order impugned is unsustainable. 5. Shri Jitendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel has argued that since the term of the Committee of Management admittedly expired in January-2023, the District Inspector of Schools has acted in consonance with Clause 2(6) of the Government Order dated 15.10.2023 which reads as follows:- "(6) माध्यमिमक शि(cid:9)्ቌा अधि(cid:13)मि(cid:14)यम-1921 में वቓኌ(cid:18)त ्ቚामिव(cid:13)ा(cid:14)ों तथा माध्यमिमक शि(cid:9)्ቌा अधि(cid:13)मि(cid:14)यम-1921 की (cid:13)ारा 16 क,16 ख,16 ग एवं 16 गग में वቓኌ(cid:18)त ्ቚ(cid:9)ास(cid:14) योज(cid:14)ा की अमि(cid:14)वाय ता यह स्प्ቖ करती है मिक अल्पसंख्यक संस्थाओं का चु(cid:14)ाव भी उ्ሹ ्ቚामिव(cid:13)ामि(cid:14)त व्यवस्था के अन्तग त सम्प्ቐ हो। यमि5 अल्पसंख्यक संस्थाओं ्ቛारा संचालि8त मिव्ቕा8यों की ्ቚबन्(cid:13) समिमधित ्ቛारा सम्प्ቐ कराये गये चु(cid:14)ाव अ(cid:14)ुमन्यता ्ቚ5ा(cid:14) मिकए जा(cid:14)े हेतु ्ቚस्ताव जिज8ा मिव्ቕा8य मि(cid:14)री्ቌक अथवा संयु्ሹ शि(cid:9)्ቌा मि(cid:14)5े(cid:9)क के पास उप8ब्(cid:13) कराया जाता है तो अधि(cid:13)मि(cid:14)यम में वቓኌ(cid:18)त उपबन्(cid:13)ों के अ(cid:14)ुरूप चु(cid:14)ाव सम्प्ቐ हुआ अथवा (cid:14)हीं यह 5ेख(cid:14)े का अधि(cid:13)कार अ(cid:14)ुमो5(cid:14)कता को होगा। " 3 6. He further submits that once the term expires, it would fall within the meaning and import of "default of the management" and, therefore, no illegality has been committed by the District Inspector of Schools. 7. Shri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the caveator has vehemently opposed the writ petition and has argued that, even if the contention of the petitioners to the effect that no Authorized Controller can be appointed in the Institution in view of Section 16-D (14) of the Act-1921, or even as per the amended Scheme of Administration, is accepted, it is not the case where any order of appointing the Authorized Controller has been passed, rather, it is a case where action has been taken on the ground that, admittedly, the term of the Committee being five years, the petitioners shall lose all authority to remain in-charge as per initial wordings of amended Clause-7 of the Scheme of Administration, its subsequent portion may be contrary to law. He has further referred to the amended provisions which provide that the term of the Committee would end after expiry of period of five years and one month, which admittedly has expired. Shri Mishra further submits that Section 3(3) of the Act, 1971 has to be read with Section 5(1) alongwith two provisos attached thereto and, once, there is no Committee of Management, as per fact and law, there cannot be any other arrangement, except the direction for operating the accounts by single hand arrangement and, therefore, no illegality has been committed by the District Inspector of Schools. 8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find that the order impugned mentions exercise of powers under Section 3(3) of the Act- 1971. For a ready reference, Section 3 of the Act-1971 is reproduced as such:- "3. Payment of salary within time and without unauthorised deductions. - (1) Notwithstanding any 4 contract to the contrary, the salary of a teacher or other employee of an institution in respect of any period after the thirty-first day of March, 1971, shall be paid to him before the expiry of the twentieth day, or such earlier day as the State Government may, by general or special order in that behalf appoint, of the month next following the month in respect of which or any part of which ,it is payable. (2) The salary shall [subject to the provisions of sub- section (3), be paid without deductions of any kind except those authorised by the regulations or by any rules made under the Act or by any other law for the time being in force. [(3) Where the salary of a teacher or other employee of an institution is not paid in accordance with sub- section (1) due to any default on the part of the management, the Inspector may, without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, pay or cause to be paid within ten days from the date mentioned in sub- section (1) of Section 5 at the rate of salary last drawn by such teacher or employee as the case may be, and in case fresh appointment at the rate of the minimum of the pay scale in which he has been appointed and any adjustment in respect of such payment shall, thereafter, be made as soon as possible.]" 9. A perusal of sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Act-1971 shows that default on the part of the management has been associated with the contingencies provided under sub-sections (1) and (2) and not otherwise. Section 3 does not contemplate any situation, whereunder, on account of expiry of term of Committee of Management, order of single hand operation can be passed. Though, it may be true that the Committee becomes defunct after the expiry of its term, insofar as the Act, 1971 is concerned, particularly, exercise under Section 3 read with Section 5 of 5 the same, the same has nothing to do with seizing or superseding the powers of the Committee of Management to exercise administrative control over the affairs of the Institution, however, the direction to operate financial accounts by single hand arrangement is confined with regard to operation of the accounts for the payment of salaries to the teaching and non-teaching staff and for no other purpose. It is not the case where any power under Section 16-D of the Act 1921 or Section 6(3) of the Act-1971 has been exercised. Insofar as, the elections are
Decision
The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed off. Order Date :- 27.9.2023 Jyotsana Digitally signed by :- JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad