IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 299 of 2007 (M/S) Committee of Management, Rashtriya Inter College Aurangabad, Haridwar, through its Manager. …… Petitioner. Versus District Education Officer, District Haridwar and another. … Respondents. Sri Sharad Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri K.P.Upadhyay, learned Additional C.S.C. for the State-respondents. Sri Lokpal Singh, Advocate, for the intervener. Date July 11, 2008. Hon’ble B.S.Verma, J. Sri Sharad Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri K.P. Upadhyay, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents and Sri Lokpal Singh, learned counsel for the intervener. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to array the Director of Education and the State of Uttarakhand as respondent nos. 3 and 4 respectively to the writ petitition. Allowed. The petitioner shall incorporate necessary amendments by filing amended memo of parties during the course of the day. This writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- I) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 12.3.2007 passed by respondents annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the writ petition. II) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to conduct the election of 2 committee of management according to the Scheme of Administration. III) Issue a writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. IV) Award the cost of the petition. So far as the first relief is concerned the ground raised by the petitioner is that the authorized controller was appointed by the District Education Officer in pursuance to the order passed by the Additional Director-respondent no.1. According to the petitioner the appointment of authorized controller as such is without jurisdiction as well as in violation of the provisions of Section 34 of the Uttaranchal School Education Act, 2006 (for short the Act). Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that under Section 34 of the Act, only the State Government is competent to appoint the authorized controller on the recommendation of the Director under sub-sections (4) and (6) of Section 34 of the Act. A perusal of record reveals that the period of committee of management has already expired in the year 2005 and the order of appointment of authorized controller was stayed by this Court on 24-4-2007. The second prayer in the writ petition is that a direction be given to the respondents to hold the election of the committee of management. It is pertinent to mention that Section 2(c) of the Act deals with the definition of Director, which reads as under:- “(c) “Director” means the Director of Education, Uttaranchal” (now Uttarakhand). 3 In the old Act (U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921), Additional Director was included in the definition of Director as given under Section 2(aaa), which reads as under:- “(aaa) “Director” means the Director of Education, Uttar Pradesh and except for purposes of Section 3, includes as Additional Director of Education.” In the present case, there is no dispute to this fact that authorized controller was appointed by the Additional Director. As such the impugned order dated 12-3-2007 is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed. The writ petition is liable to be allowed. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 12-3-2007, passed by District Education Officer, Haridwar, is quashed. However, it is provided that the Director of Education shall take steps to appoint new authorized controller. The third respondent shall make his recommendation to the State Government within a period of two weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order and the fourth respondent i.e. the State Government shall appoint the authorized controller within a period of two weeks thereafter, as per provisions of sub- sections (4) and (6) of Section 34 of the Act. It is further directed that the newly appointed authorized controller shall conduct the election of committee of management in accordance with law and as per Scheme of Administration expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of his appointment as authorized controller. ( B.S.Verma, J. ) RCP 4 5 6