JUDGMENT Rakesh Tiwari, J.
1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. Earlier elections of the office bearers of the Committee of Management of Janta Inter College, Nagla Mohan, Post Dhumari, district Etah were earlier held on 8.2.1986 in which Turram Singh was elected as the President and Mahendra Singh Yadav was elected as the Manager of the Institution. The next election was held on 1.1.1989 in which also Turram Singh was elected as President and Mahendra Singh Yadav was elected as Manager.
3. It appears that an election dispute came into existence which was decided by the Joint Director of Education, Agra Region, Agra vide order dated 27.12.1989 holding Turram Singh, President and Mahendra Singh Yadav as the Manager according to election dated 1.1.1989. The signatures of Mahendra Singh Yadav were attested by District Inspector of Schools, Etah on 2.1.1990.
4. It is alleged that Mahendra Singh Yadav who was said to have been elected as Manager died on 14.1.2005 and the District Inspector of Schools was informed about this fact and he was requested for single operation of the account. The District Inspector of Schools vide his order dated 26.2.2005 ordered for single operation and also wrote to the Joint Director of Education, Agra Region, Agra vide letter dated 7.4.2005 for appointment of the authorized controller.
5. It appears that in the meantime another election was held on 27.2.2005 by one Sukhbir. The Joint Director, Agra vide letter dated 3.5.2005 called for certain queries from the D.I.O.S. However, the District Inspector of Schools did not reply to the queries and instead requested for according approval of Sukhbir as Manager of the Institution.
6. It also appears that the Joint Director, Agra directed the D.I.O.S. to accord approval to the election held on 27,2.2005 and accordingly, the D.I.O.S. attested the signatures of Sukhbir as Manager of the Institution.
7. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 50404 of 2005, Committee of Management of Janta Inter College, Nagla Mohan and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. which was dismissed vide Judgment dated 17.10.2005 on application for withdrawal of the writ petition filed on 2nd August, 2005. The operative portion of the order is as under:
Be that as it may it is not necessary for this Court to enquire into the matter as to whether the writ petition contains the signatures of Sri Turram Singh Yadav or not in view of the order proposed to be passed. Since there is an application by Sri M. D. Mishra, Advocate also for permission to withdraw the Vakalatnama on behalf of the petitioner No. 2. I think the interest of justice would be served by allowing the said application and permitting Sri M. D. Mishra, Advocate to withdraw his vakalatnama on behalf of petitioner No. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the present case I also feel it expedient and proper to allow the application of Sri Turram Singh Yadav to the extent that he does not want to prosecute the writ petition any further. In view of the above the writ petition stands dismissed so far as petitioner No. 2 is concerned.
There is another application filed by the petitioner praying that Kotwal Singh may be permitted to be substituted as Manager of the Committee of Management and the name of Kotwal Singh son of Sri Govind Singh be allowed to be added as petitioner' No. 2 and the writ petition be amended accordingly.
Sri P.N. Saxena, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Amit Saxena, "Advocate seriously opposed the said application and invited attention of this Court towards the approved scheme of administration, which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. At page 27 of the scheme of administration under Clause Jha, it has been provided that the Manager of the Committee of Management shall represent the committee of management in all the litigations and only Manager is authorized to file the documents etc. under his signatures. Elaborating the argument it was submitted by Sri Saxena that the present writ petition as it stands today is liable to be dismissed as not maintainable.
I have given careful consideration to the respective submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties. Sri M.D. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that if the amendment sought for by him is allowed, the writ petition can be maintained. After hearing learned Counsel for both the parties, I am of the opinion that no such permission to amend the writ petition can be granted. It is open to Sri Tara Chand, or any other person who may feel aggrieved against any order to challenge the same in accordance with law.
The writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable in view of the subsequent development occurred in the case.
Hon. P. Krishna, J.
17.10.2005
8. This writ petition has been filed again on the same ground on which Writ Petition No. 50404 of 2005 was filed for the following reliefs.
(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders of District Inspector of Schools, Etah dated 18.5.2005 (Annexure-8) and 6.6.2005 (Annexures-10 and 11) and of Regional Joint Director of Education dated 4.6.2005 (Annexure-9) to the writ petition;
(b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to approve the election dated 20.2.2005 and to attest the signature of the petitioner No. 2, as the Manager of Janta Inter College, Nagla Mohan, P.O. Dhumari, district Etah;
(c) issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondent No. 4 from acting as Manager of the aforesaid college;
(d) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
(e) Call for the record.
(f) Award the cost of the writ petition.
9. The reliefs claimed in this writ petition are also identical to that of Writ Petition No. 50404 of 2005. The reliefs claimed in this writ petition are as under:
(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders of District Inspector of Schools, Etah dated 18.5.2005 (Annexure-8) and 6.6.2005 (Annexures-10 and 11) and of the Regional Joint Director of Education dated 4.6.2005 (Annexure-9) to the writ petition;
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to approve the election dated 20.2.2005 as rectified vide resolution dated 25.9.2005 and to attest the signature of Tara Chandra as Manager of the Committee of Management Janta Inter College Nagla Mohan P.O. Dhumari, district Etah;
(c) Issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from interfering in the functioning of Tara Chandra as Manager of the aforesaid college;
(d) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
(e) Call for the record;
(f) Award the cost of the writ petition.
10. The counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the averments made in paragraph 17 of the writ petition in which it has been stated that That in the meantime, Sri Sukhbir Singh son of late Mahendra Singh Yadav, the Ex-Manager of the College who is not even an ordinary member of the Society or of the committee of management and is working as Assistant Teacher in a recognized and aided Junior High School, Kailash Mandir, Etah, manipulated the things in his own way showing a fictitious elections of the committee of management on 27.2.2005 and declared himself to be manager of the Institution and sent the papers to the D.I.O.S. for necessary action and the D.I.O.S. vide letter dated 15.4.2005 addressed to the Regional Joint Director of Education, Agra requested for decision of the Regional Committee and the Regional Joint Director of Education vide letter dated 3.5.2005 called for the explanation of the District Inspector of Schools. The true copy of the letter dated 3.5.2005 is being filed as Annexure-8 to this writ petition.
11. Sri Sandeep Mookerji, the standing counsel for the respondents relying upon the averments made in para 1 of the writ petition raised a preliminary objection that this writ being second writ petition is not maintainable. Paragraph 1 of the writ petition is as under;
That this is the second writ petition on behalf of the committee of management through its Manager Shri Tara Chandra and the first writ petition filed by the committee of management through its President Kotwal Singh and Turram Singh has been dismissed with liberty to file the writ petition by the person aggrieved.
12. He further submits that in Writ Petition No. 50404 of 2005, Committee of Management, Janta Inter College, Nagla Mohan and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Ors. after hearing the learned Counsel for both the parties the Court has opined that no such permission to amend the writ petition can be granted and it is open to Sri Tara Chand or any person who may feel aggrieved against any order to challenge the same in accordance with law. The aforesaid writ petition was dismissed after hearing the counsel for both the parties. Counter-affidavit has been filed in that case by Sri P.N. Saxena, counsel for the respondents and it has been urged that the writ petition was not maintainable as under the Scheme of Administration under clause Jha it has been provided that the Manager of the Committee of Management shall represent the committee of management in all the litigations and only the Manager is authorized to file documents etc. under his signatures as such the writ petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable. The parties in both the writ petitions are identical and the same. In the earlier writ petition the Court had not allowed any amendment in the writ petition.
13. Apart from the above there are disputed questions of facts pertaining to the validity of election of the committee of management. The same order has been challenged in this writ petition, which has been challenged in the earlier writ petition. It requires findings of facts on the basis of oral and documentary evidence which is not feasible under Article 226 of the Constitution for this Court to record evidence and decide the disputed questions of facts as has been held in Basant Prasad Srivastava and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. (1993) 2 UPLBEC 1333. The only remedy in accordance with law available to the petitioner in pursuance of judgment dated 17.10.2005 for settlement of the disputed questions of facts is by way of civil suit before the civil court.
14. Admittedly, there is dispute between two parallel committees of managements. Allegations of collusion and fraud are hurled against each other. The contention of the counsel for the respondents Sri P.N. Saxena in identical writ petition was that it was not maintainable. The Court had dismissed the aforesaid writ petition on the ground that it is not necessary for the Court to enquire in the matter as to whether the writ petition contains the signature of Turram Singh Yadav or not. Sri M.D. Mishra who is petitioner's counsel in this writ petition and also in aforesaid Writ Petition No. 509404 of 2005 had withdrawn his vakalatnama in that case. In the circumstances, the authorized controller shall be appointed by respondent No. 2, Regional Joint Director of Education, Agra Region, Agra for managing the affairs of the Institution in question till the dispute is finally decided through civil court.
15. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.