THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.33970 of 1997, 15780 of 1998 and 15217 of 1999 COMMON JUDGMENT: Tenali Sri Sraddhananda Harijan Colony Society was registered way back in the year 1945 by nine founder members. The object of the society was to establish educational and other philanthropical institutions in and around Tenali. A school was established initially at the primary level and thereafter, it was upgraded to high school and was admitted to grant-in-aid. One Smt.Taayaramma was functioning as Secretary and Correspondent of the Institution, till she died on 06.03.1997. Her son, by name Dharma Kumar, is said to have been elected as Secretary in her place; and Head Mistress, by name Vedavathi, who is incidentally the wife of Dharma Kumar, was chosen as the Correspondent of the Institution in a meeting held on 07.03.1997. Proposals were also submitted for recognition of the Secretary and the Correspondent. The recognition by the Regional Joint Director for the Institution expired with the year 1996-97. Application for renewal of the recognition was also pending. The Commissioner and Director of School Education, 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice, dated 18.10.1997, to the Correspondent/Management of the institution, wherein three charges were framed. The first was in relation to the alleged harassment of teachers; second is about the closure of the school, without notice to the Department; and the third is with regard to the relieving of staff members of the School. A reply was submitted by the Head Mistress/Correspondent on 11.11.1997. The 2nd respondent took the view that the person, who replied to the show cause notice, is not competent and accordingly passed an order, dated 18.05.1998 directing take over of the management of the institution and appointing a special officer for it. W.P.No.15780 of 1998 is filed challenging the proceedings dated 18.05.1998. Before the said order came to be passed, it is stated that the physical possession of the institution was taken forcibly. W.P.No.33970 of 1997 is filed complaining the said action. The Head Mistress of the institution filed W.P.No.15217 of 1999 complaining that though rest of the staff members are given orders of postings at various institutions, she is not extended such facility. The respondents filed counter affidavits in the respective writ petitions. It is stated that the institution, which was under the management of the society, has resorted to several irregularities. According to them, out of the nine founder members, eight died long ago and last such member viz., Secretary/Correspondent died on 06.03.1997 and thereby, there was no management of the society in the eye of law. It is also stated that the so- called appointment or election of the Secretary or the Correspondent, as the case may be, was contrary to law and was not recognized by the concerned authorities. Reference is made to the representations submitted by the teaching staff, complaining forcible relief and harassment. It is alleged that the students were given transfer certificates with the sole object of closing the institution and to appropriate the property. Heard Sri Abhinand Kumar Shavili, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for School Education. A High School was established by the Society and the same was admitted to grant-in-aid. As long as the grant-in-aid subsists, the authorities of the Education Department would have control, to ensure that that the institution is run properly. The Secretary and Correspondent of an institution happens to be the link between the management and the departmental officials. It is a matter of record that the Correspondent of the Institution died on 06.03.1997. If according to the respondents, there was vacuum, on account of the death of the Correspondent, there was no occasion for them to issue a show cause notice, dated 18.10.1997, addressed to the Correspondent. On the other hand, if they wanted the person-in-charge of the institution to reply to the charges, the one submitted by the person acting as Secretary/Correspondent ought to have been examined. However, in the impugned order, dated 18.05.1998, it was mentioned that the person, who submitted the reply, is not recognized, and as such, it cannot be taken into account. Such an approach is self-contradictory. Having issued a show cause notice, the 2nd respondent cannot refuse to examine the reply. Be that as it may, before forming an opinion that there is no management for the institution, the respondents ought to have verified the necessary facts. Any society, whether registered under the Co-operative Societies Act or the Societies Registration Act, is a continuous body and it can be said to have ceased to exist, if only there was total absence of membership or it was brought to liquidation or closure, in accordance with the procedure known to law. No such efforts were made to ascertain the legal status of the society. The death of some individuals, even majority of them, does not result in cessation of the society. In case, the appointment of the Secretary/Correspondent was not satisfactory, necessary reply ought to have been given, pointing out the defect in the process of appointment or selection. Even while sitting over the matter, for recognition of the Secretary/Correspondent, the 2nd respondent had passed the impugned order. The same cannot be sustained in law. On factual aspects, the action of the respondents cannot be sustained. The reason is that the management of the institution was taken over way back in the year 1997 and the institution could not be revived. The very purpose of appointment of the special officer was defeated. Once it emerges that the school cannot be run, the institution viz., its properties, have to be made over to the society. Since a decade has elapsed, the respondents have to ascertain the actual agency, to whom the institution has to be handed over. For this purpose, the District Registrar, who maintains the records in relation to the societies registered under the Societies Registration Act, would be the proper authority. Hence, W.P.No.33970 of 1997 and 15780 of 1998 are allowed the impugned order, dated 18.05.1998, is set aside. The respondents are directed to hand over the institution to such agency, as is identified on verification from the District Registrar, Guntur. It is however made clear that in case, the respondents intend to revive the institution by allocating full strength of teaching and non- teaching staff and making other arrangements, it shall be open to them to insist on the school being revived. The grievance of the petitioner in W.P.No.15217 of 1999 is about the refusal by the respondents to give orders of posting to her. It is now represented that the petitioner has since retired from service. Therefore, no orders, as prayed for in the writ petition, can be passed. She has to work out her remedies as to terminal benefits as per law. W.P.No.15217 of 1999 is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 04.12.2008 JSU THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY Writ Petition Nos.33970 of 1997, 15780 of 1998 and 15217 of 1999 Date: 04.12.2008 JSU