WP(C) 535/2009 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA. Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. A.F.N.U. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. A.K. Sarma, learned counsel representing the Respondent No.6. I have also heard Mr. M.K. Misra, lear ned Standing Counsel, Education Department. This writ petition has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the approval dated 5.12.2008 accorded by the Block Elementary Education Offi cer, Lakhipur Block to the constitution of the Managing Committee of the school in question headed by the Respondent No.6. From the materials on record, it ap pears that a general public meeting for electing the members of the Managing Co mmittee of the school was held on 25.9.2008. In the meeting, the petitioner wa s unanimously elected as the President. The petitioner has annexed photocopy of the minutes of the meeting from which it appears that the figure 1 has been interpolated with the figure 2 . The meeting was presided over by the petition er as the President and was elected as President of the SMC. However, by the man ipulation, the name of the Respondent No.6 came to be incorporated as the elec ted President. The fact of manipulation is discernible from the Annexure-4 enquiry repo rt dated 3.11.2008, as per which some people had walked out from the meeting wh en it was declared that the School Managing committee would be constituted on t hat day. By Annexure-5 letter dated 10.11.2008, the District Mission Co-ordinati on Officer, Goalpara was informed by the petitioner as to how the Respondent N o.6 had committed illegality by forming another Managing Committee consisting of his own relatives. Annexure-6 is the letter dated 25.9.2008 addressed to the Block Elementa ry Education Officer, Lakhipur Block by one Afzalur Rahman (the Respondent No.7) , a sitting M.L.A. By the said letter, he requested to elect the Respondent No. 6 as the President of the School Managing Committee. Certain allegations were a lso made against the petitioner. It is on the basis of the said letter, the Sch ool Managing Committee headed by the Respondent No.6 was approved by the afores aid impugned approval dated 5.12.2008 (Annexure-7 to the writ petition). The Respondent No.6 has filed Misc. Case No.1174/2009 seeking vacation of the interim order passed on 20.2.2009. As agreed to by the learned counsel fo r the parties, the matter has been heard finally. In the Misc. Case, it is the c ase of the Respondent No.6 that since he was elected as the President of the Ma naging Committee, he should be allowed to function along with the members of the School Managing Committee constituted for the purpose. Mr. Misra, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department has produced the proce eding book of the meeting held on 25.9.2008. On a mere perusal of the same, th e manipulation about which mention has been made above, finds support. The peti tioner was at Sl. No.1 and the Respondent No.6 was at Sl. No.2 in the race for t he post of President. It is the petitioner who was elected but by manipulation of figure 1 to that of figure 2 , the Respondent No.6 was shown to be the e ected President. This course of action was adopted in view of the aforesaid Ann exure-6 letter dated 25.9.2008 addressed to the Block Elementary Education Off icer by said Shri Afzalur Rahman (the Respondent No.7), a sitting M.L.A. by whic h he expressed his desire to appoint the Respondent No.6 as the President and to approve the School Managing Committee constituted by him. What has happened in this case is that the School Managing Committee was consti tuted as desired by the Respondent No.7 and the manipulation was made only to s how that it was in fact the Respondent No.6, who was elected as the President of the School Managing Committee. For all the aforesaid reasons the order dated 5.12.2008 is not sustainable and a ccordingly, is set aside. The matter shall go back to the authority for consider ation of the matter in accordance with law. Needless to say that while consider ing the matter in its entirety, the authority will take into account all the re levant facts and circumstances including the eligibility of the petitioner, as has been raised by the Respondent No.6. The authority shall also take into acc ount the existing guidelines holding the field. Writ petition stands disposed of.