WA 224/2008 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR J CHELAMESWAR HON’BLE MR JUSTICE IA ANSARI Heard Mr KK Mahanta, learned senior counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr HRA Choudhury, learned senior counsel for the private respondents and Mr VM Thomas, learned counsel for the State respondents. Aggrieved by judgment and order dated 17-6-08 in WP(C) No.3070/07 the 4th respon dent therein filed the present appeal. The above mentioned writ petition came to be filed as the respondent Nos.4 to 12 herein were aggrieved by an order of the 3rd respondent herein dated 5-6-07. Th e dispute revolves around constitution of the Managing Committee of Ambari High School, Nagaon. The constitution and all other allied matters of the Managing Committees of Aide d Higher Secondary, High and Middle Schools in the State of Assam are governed b y a set of Rules called Assam Aided Higher Secondary, High and Middle Schools Ma nagement Rules, 1976. Such Rules are made by the Governor obviously in exercise of the authority conferred on the Governor under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. Under Rule 3 of the above mentioned Rules every school falling under any one of the above categories is required to be managed by a Managing Committee. Under Ru le 4 such a Managing Committee is to consist of various persons specified under Sub Rule (a) thereof. Some of the members are required to be elected under Sub R ule (a). While the President is required to be nominated by the government and t he Secretary is chosen ex-officio. The power of the nomination of the President is delegated further to the Inspector of Schools under the above mentioned Rule. Further, the Governing Body once constituted is required to be approved by the Inspector of Schools under Rule 3. In exercise of the power under Rule 3 the 3rd respondent herein earlier constitu ted a Managing Committee of the above mentioned school by its proceeding dated 1 2-06. It appears that subsequently some complaints were received by the 3rd resp ondent against the members of such Managing Committee and, therefore, by an orde r dated 13-3-06 the 3rd respondent kept the above mentioned Managing Committee i n abeyance. However, by an order dated 15-7-06 the order dated 13-3-06 was vacat ed, the details of which may not be necessary at present. From the record we find that an undisputed fact is that the President nominated to the above mentioned Managing Committee, that is, the respondent No.1 and the 8th respondent herein, who is an elected member from the category of donors of t he school are convicted for offences u/s 147/448/323 IPC by the Sessions Court a nd on appeal their conviction was confirmed by this court in Criminal Appeal No. 335/01 on 2-3-07. It must be mentioned here that the convicts carried the matter to the Supreme Court and Special Leave Petition (SLP) is pending and we are inf ormed that during the pendency of the SLP the Supreme Court directed the convict s to be released on bail. It appears that the 3rd respondent once again received certain complaints on 28- 5-07, the exact details of the said complaints are not available before us. Basi ng on the said complaints the 3rd respondent by the order impugned in the writ p etition dated 5-6-07 purported to reconstitute the Managing Committee of the abo ve mentioned school. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows :- O R D E R In partial modification of this office letter issued under Memo No. Dt. The Managing Committee of the Ambari High School is hereby re constituted with following persons with immediate effect. The other terms and conditions will remain same. 1. Md Khalil Ahmed - President 2. Headmaster - Secretary 3. Abdul Latif Mazarbhuiya- Member 4. Maulana Abdullah - Member 5. Abdul Wahid - Member 6. Fakhar Uddin Barbhuyan- Member 7. Rafique Ahmed - Teacher 8. Mrs Archana Dey - Lady Member 9. Sri Debendra Biswas - Donor Sd/ Md. A.R. Choudhury, Inspector of Schools,i/c Nagaon Dist. Circle, Nagaon, Assam It can be seen from the above that all the persons who are members of th e Managing Committee constituted by the order of the 3rd respondent dated 1-2-06 were relieved from the Committee and a fresh set of 9 persons came to be appoin ted as the Members of the Managing Committee. Challenging the said order the mem bers of the Managing Committee constituted under the order dated 1-6-06 filed th e writ petition from out of which the present appeal arises. By the judgment and order under appeal a learned Judge of this court all owed the writ petition on the ground that though the 3rd respondent, that is, th e Inspector of Schools, has the power to dissolve or reconstitute the Managing C ommittee of any school under Rule 6, such a power is required to be exercised su bject to the approval of the Director of Secondary Education. The learned Judge found that such an approval was neither sought for nor was produced at any point of time before the matter came to be considered before this court. Therefore, t he learned Judge held that the decision of the 3rd respondent in reconstituting the Managing Committee of the above mentioned school by its proceeding dated 5- 6-07 is illegal. Mr Mahanta, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that whil e Rule 6 prescribed obtaining of approval of the Director for a decision to reco nstitute the Managing Committee of the school by the concerned Inspector the Rul e 6 makes it explicit that such an approval is presumed to have been obtained in any general or special order of the Director and in view of the fact that the D irector filed an affidavit in the above mentioned writ petition approving the de cision of the 3rd respondent herein the learned Judge ought not to have recorded a finding that the decision of the 3rd respondent to reconstitute the Committee is violative of law. We do not think it necessary to examine the submission made by the learn ed counsel for the appellant on the construction of Rule 6 referred to above but we propose to dispose of the appeal as follows. Assuming for the sake of argument that the affidavit in opposition filed during the pendency of the writ petition by the Director should be taken to be an approval within the meaning of Rule 6 of the above mentioned Rules such an ap proval is required to be based on relevant considerations. Neither the impugned order dated 5-6-07 of the 3rd respondent nor the affidavit filed by the 10th res pondent (Director of Secondary Education) disclose what exactly the nature of th e complaint against the members of the Managing Committee other than the two who are convicted in the criminal case referred to earlier. In such circumstances w e do not find any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal on principl e but on the facts that the two of the members of the earlier Managing Committee are already found guilty of various Sections of the IPC, setting aside the impu gned order dated 5-6-07 in its entirety would have the effect of permitting such convicts to run the affairs of the school which in our view would be inconsiste nt with the public policy. Apart from that, there appears to be some complaint d ated 28-5-07 against the members of the Managing Committee. Whether the complain t is limited to the above mentioned two convict members of the Managing Committ ee or is a complaint against the other members is not clear from the records bef ore us. In the circumstances, we dispose of the appeal directing the 10th respon dent to examine whether the order of the 3rd respondent dated 5-6-07 insofar as it purports to relieve all the members of the earlier Managing Committee, other than the two who are convicted for offences under the IPC, is sustainable in law on the materials available and reach a conclusion within a period of three week s from today. Until such a decision is reached by the 10th respondent neither th e earlier Committee nor the reconstituted Committee by the order dated 5-6-07 of the 3rd respondent shall function as the Managing Committee of the above mentio ned school. If the 10th respondent reaches a conclusion, on examination of the m aterials, that the order dated 5-6-07 is required to be approved in its entirety then the order dated 5-6-07 constituting the new Managing Committee shall take effect. If the 10th respondent reaches conclusion otherwise in respect of all or some of the members of the earlier Managing Committee then appropriate further decision is required to be taken by the 3rd respondent making an appropriate arr angement for the management of the school in accordance with law. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. Furnish a copy of this order to Mr VM Thomas, learned State Counsel by t omorrow.