# C/M Janta Inter College Jaitpur Kalan, Agra & Anr v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2021) 11 ILRA 505
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-12-02
- **Case number:** Writ-C No. 32017 of 2021
- **Bench:** Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/c-m-janta-inter-college-jaitpur-kalan-agra-anr-v-state-of-u-p-ors-46592
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

A. Constitution of India - Article 14 & 21 - UP
Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - Section 16A - Committee of management - Single
operation of bank account - Principle of natural
justice - Applicability - No opportunity of
hearing was given - Effect - Ex parte order
passed - Validity challenged - Held, there is
substance
in
the
submissions
that
the
impugned order directing single operation of
bank accounts of the petitioners' institution, is
passed in violation of principle of natural
justice
and
Articles
14
and
21
of
the
Constitution of India, as there is no whisper as
on which date, opportunity of hearing has been
afforded to the petitioners or to any officebearers of the Committee of Management of
the petitioners' institution before passing the
same, hence, the same is an ex-parte order -
High Court remitted back the matter to the
DIOS after setting aside the impugned order.
(Para 9, 12 and 13)
Appeal allowed. (E-1)
Cases relied on :-
506 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

## Text

11 All. C/M Janta Inter College Jaitpur Kalan, Agra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
505

"It has always been a principle that
certiorari will go only where there is no other
equally effective and convenient remedy.

.....................

The statutory system of appeals is more
effective and more convenient than application
for certiorari and the principal reason why it
may prove itself more convenient and more
effective is that an appeal to (say) the secretary
of State can be disposed of at one hearing
whether the issue between them is a matter of
law or fact or policy or opinion or a
combination of some or all of these....whereas of
course an appeal for certiorari is limited to
cases where the issue is a matter of law and then
only it is a matter of law appearing on the face
of the order.

.........

An application for certiorari has however this
advantage that it is speedier and cheaper than the
other methods and in a proper case therefore it may
well be right to allow it to be used......I would,
however, define a proper case as being one where
the decision in question is liable to be upset as a
matter of law because on its face it is clearly made
without jurisdiction or in consequence of an error of
law."

34. Similar view has been reiterated in Seth
Chand Ratan Vs. Pandit Durga Prasad & Ors,
reported in 2003 AIR SCW 3078.

35. In view of the aforesaid law laid down by
the Apex Court and considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, this writ petition is
disposed of by providing that the petitioner, may
make reference petition against the order impugned
before the Chancellor of the University, under
Section 68 of the U.P. State within three weeks from
today, along with a certified copy of this order. On
such reference petition being filed, the Chancellor of
the respondent-University is requested to consider
and decide the same, in accordance with law by
means of a reasoned speaking order, preferably
within one month thereafter after affording
opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned.
----------
(2021)12ILR A505
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 02.12.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J.

Writ-C No. 32017 of 2021

C/M Janta Inter College Jaitpur Kalan, Agra &
Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sri Prabhakar Awasthi

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

A. Constitution of India - Article 14 & 21 - UP
Intermediate Education Act, 1921 - Section 16A - Committee of management - Single
operation of bank account - Principle of natural
justice - Applicability - No opportunity of
hearing was given - Effect - Ex parte order
passed - Validity challenged - Held, there is
substance
in
the
submissions
that
the
impugned order directing single operation of
bank accounts of the petitioners' institution, is
passed in violation of principle of natural
justice
and
Articles
14
and
21
of
the
Constitution of India, as there is no whisper as
on which date, opportunity of hearing has been
afforded to the petitioners or to any officebearers of the Committee of Management of
the petitioners' institution before passing the
same, hence, the same is an ex-parte order -
High Court remitted back the matter to the
DIOS after setting aside the impugned order.
(Para 9, 12 and 13)
Appeal allowed. (E-1)
Cases relied on :-
506 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
1. Committee of Management, Anjuman Hidayatul
Islam High School & anr. Vs St. of U.P. & ors.;
2013(5) ESC 2748 (All).
(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani
Chauhan, J.)

1. Heard Mr. Prabhakar Awasthi, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra
Singh, learned Standing Counsel for Staterespondents.

2. This writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner for quashing the impugned order dated
20.11.2021 passed by respondent no.4, District
Inspector of Schools, Agra, whereby he has
directed single operation of bank accounts of the
petitioners' institution. He has also prayed for a
direction upon the respondents not to interfere in
the peaceful functioning of the petitioners'
Committee of Management continuously in
managing day to day affairs of the institution,
which has been validly elected on 22.08.2021
and approved on 13.10.2021.

3. Learned counsel for the parties are agree
that the present writ petition may be decided at
this stage, without calling for any further
affidavits specially in view of the order proposed
to be passed, as no purpose would be served by
keeping the present writ petition pending.

4. The brief facts of the case are that the
petitioners'
institution
is
a
recognized
intermediate college in the name and style of
"Janta Inter College, Jaitpur, Kalan" District
Agra which is managed by a Committee of
Management,
duly
elected,
strictly
in
consonance with the provisions of scheme of
administration framed and drawn under exercise
of powers under Section 16-A of U.P.
Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter
referred to as the "Act, 1921").

5. The aforesaid institution is under
grant-in-aid of the State Government, as such,
provisions
of
U.P.
High
School
and
Intermediate (Payment of salary to Teaching
and other Staff) 1971 (hereinafter referred to
as the "Act, 1971") is fully applicable. The last
valid election of Committee of Management
was held on 31.08.2017 from 13 members,
wherein Shri Dayaram was elected as Manager
and Mahesh Babu was elected as President.
The aforesaid elections were approved by the
District Inspector of Schools on 26.09.2017.

6.

The
aforesaid
elections
were
challenged, by means of Writ Petition No.
59533 of 2017, and the said writ petition stood
rejected by the order dated 13.12.2017. During
the sustenance of term of the aforesaid
Committee of Management, 16 new members
were enrolled, out of which, petitioner no.2
also stood enrolled as a member. The Manager
of the aforesaid Committee of Management,
namely, Shri Dayaram expired on 19.04.2021,
as a result whereof, a casual vacancy came
into existence. The petitioner no.2 being a
valid member was elected as Manager for
residue period under the resolution dated
27.06.2021, strictly in consonance with Clause
9(4) of the scheme of administration and the
same was approved by the District Inspector
of Schools vide order dated 23.07.2021.

7. The term of the Committee of
Management, as provided in the approved
scheme of administration, is 4 years and since
the last elections were held on 31.08.2017,
therefore, the term of the aforesaid Committee
of Management was come to an end on
30.08.2021, hence, valid elections of the
Committee of Management were held on
22.08.2021, wherein again Committee of
Management headed by petitioner no.2 as
Manager came to be elected and the same was
also approved by the District Inspector of
Schools vide order dated 13.10.2021. In
between, an order dated 12.10.2021 was
passed by District Inspector of Schools,
11 All. C/M Janta Inter College Jaitpur Kalan, Agra & Anr. Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
507
wherein the election of Shri Sridhar Srivastava
as Manager for the residue period was
discarded, as the aforesaid claim was made
after the expiry of the term of Committee of
Management,
which
was
elected
on
31.08.2017.

8. Surprisingly, on a complaint made by
the Principal of the said institution, who
happens to be ex-officio office-bearer, the
District Inspector of Schools has passed the
impugned order dated 20.11.2021, whereby he
has directed single operation of bank accounts
of the petitioners' institution.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the impugned order dated
20.11.2021 passed by District Inspector of
Schools, Agra, directing single operation of
bank accounts of the petitioners' institution, is
in violation of principle of natural justice and
Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India,
as there is no whisper as on which date,
opportunity of hearing has been afforded to
the petitioners or to any office-bearers of the
Committee of Management of the petitioners'
institution before passing the same, hence, the
same is an ex-parte order and liable to be
quashed on that ground alone.

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner
next submits that order impugned dated
20.11.2021 passed by D.I.O.S. is wholly
without jurisdiction as after approving the
petitioners' Committee of Management, the
District Inspector of Schools becomes functus
officio and, therefore, he cannot uproot the
petitioners' Committee of Management, which
has already been approved by him vide his
order dated 13.10.2021. In support of the
aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the
petitioner
has
placed
reliance
upon
a
judgement of this Court in the case of
Committee of Management, Committee of
Management, Anjuman Hidayatul Islam
High School And Another Vs. State of U.P.
And Others decided on 3rd October, 2013 in
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46324 of 2013,
reported in 2013(5) ESC 2748 (All).

11. Learned Standing Counsel has not
satisfactorily controverted or rebutted the
aforesaid submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners.

12. Having heard the learned counsel for
the parties, considered their submissions and
gone through the order impugned, this Court
finds substance in the submissions made by
the learned counsel for the petitioners.

13. In such circumstances, the order
dated 20.11.2021 passed by the District
Inspector of Schools, Agra directing single
operation of bank accounts of the petitioners'
institution is set aside and the matter is
remitted back to the District Inspector of
Schools, Agra for decision afresh. While
considering the same afresh, the District
Inspector of Schools, Agra shall call for the
objections/reply and other documents from the
petitioners regarding the complaint made
against him, within two weeks from date of
production of a certified copy of this order. On
calling for objections/reply or documents, the
petitioners shall file their reply/objections,
supported by such documents, as they may be
advised, within two weeks thereafter. In case,
such objections/reply is filed within the
aforesaid time, the District Inspector of
Schools, Agra shall consider and decide the
same, strictly in accordance with law, by
means of a reasoned and speaking order
preferably within two weeks thereafter after
affording opportunity of hearing to the parties
concerned.

14. The present writ petition is allowed
subject to the observations made above.
----------
508 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
(2021)12ILR A508
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 17.11.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE NEERAJ TIWARI, J.

Writ-C No. 45899 of 2017

Zakir ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Parvez Alam, Sri Devesh Vikram

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C.

A. UP Scheduled Commodities Distribution
Order, 2016 - Section 13(1) - Fair price shop
license - Allotment - Filing of appeal by a
person not participated in the
allotment
proceeding - Locus challenged - Held, only
aggrieved person, who has participated in the
process of allotment of fair price shop can file
appeal. Any appeal filed by stranger/ outsider
is not maintainable. (Para 12)
Writ petition allowed. (E-1)
Cases relied on :-
1. Babu Ram Singh Vs St. of U.P. & ors.; [2009 (10)
ADJ 24]
2. Neeraj Kumar Mishra Vs Dy. Commissioner (Food)
Region Allahabad & ors.; 2017 (3) AdJ 834
3. Writ-C No. 49975 of 2015; Kailash Singh Vs St. of
U.P. & ors. decided on 03.09.2015.
(Delivered by Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned Standing Counsel for State-
respondents.

2. Present petition has been filed for writ of
certiorari quashing the impugned order dated
22.08.2017 passed by Joint Commissioner
(Food),
Saharanpur
Region,
Saharanpur-
respondent no. 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that he is resident of Village Parasauli,
Block
Kandla,
Tehsil
Budhana,
District
Muzaffarnagar and there are four fair price shop
established in the said village having total
number of 9230 beneficiaries. To meet out the
interest of local residents, Gaon Sabha decided
for establishment for 5th fair price shop in the
same village. Accordingly, vide resolution dated
26.08.2016, decision was taken for allotment of
fair price shop under the reserve category i.e.
reservation of Gram Pradhan. Under the
aforesaid resolution, three applicants, namely,
Zakir (petitioner), Raees and Abdul Hasan
applied for allotment of fair price shop and
unanimously, it was allotted in favour of
petitioner.
After
aforesaid
resolution,
an
agreement
was
executed
and
now
after
completion of all legal formalities, he was issued
allotment letter dated 21.10.2016 by respondent
no. 4.

4. He next submitted that to utter surprise,
Ex-Pradhan,
namely,
Satyendra
Saini
(respondent no. 5), on the very next date of
allotment order i.e. 21.10.2016, filed an
application before Block Development Officer,
Block-
Budhana,
Muzaffarnagar
alleging
irregularities of process of allotment of fair price
shop such as allotment was made without calling
open meeting of Gaon Sabha. After receiving the
aforesaid complaint, respondent no. 4 directed
the Block Development Officer to hold enquiry
vide order dated 25.10.2016. Pursuant to order
dated 25.10.2016, Block Development Officer
constituted enquiry committee of two members
vide order dated 27.10.2016. Enquiry committee
investigated the matter and vide its letter dated
04.11.2016
submitted
enquiry
report
categorically stating that allotment of fair price
shop in favour of petitioner was done in