Uttarakhand High Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Private School Management Disputes
The Uttarakhand High Court has issued a significant clarification regarding the jurisdiction of authorities in disputes related to the management of non-government schools. The court has explicitly held that the director of education possesses powers under the Uttarakhand School Education Act, 2006, to supervise management matters and investigate irregularities in appointments.
Court Order and Specific Case Details
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay delivered this order while hearing a special appeal filed by the management committee of RMPP Vidyalaya Inter College, Gurukul Narsan, Roorkee. The bench directed a committee constituted by the director of school education to complete its inquiry into alleged appointment irregularities within twelve weeks.
The court elaborated that the director of education is empowered to investigate complaints concerning appointments, rectify deficiencies, and, if necessary, recommend the removal of a management committee. Furthermore, the director can propose the appointment of an authorised controller by the state government.
Distinction Between Jurisdictions
However, the court provided a crucial clarification by distinguishing between different types of disputes. It ruled that disputes relating to the elections of a management committee fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the registrar of chit funds and societies under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The bench observed that while education authorities have supervisory powers under Section 29(7) of the Uttarakhand School Education Act, they cannot adjudicate election disputes between rival committees.
"Such election matters must be decided under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act," the court stated, emphasizing the separation of legal domains.
Background of the Legal Case
The case originated when a single bench dismissed a petition challenging an inquiry initiated by the additional director and the director of education into alleged irregularities in appointments and management committee elections. Subsequently, the school management committee contested the validity of the inquiry committee formed by the director of school education.
A three-member inquiry committee was initially formed in January of the previous year by the additional director, Garhwal, and later by the director of school education. This action followed a formal complaint lodged by a lifetime member of the school's general body. The complaint alleged misuse of powers by the management committee and specific irregularities in appointment processes.
Elections for the management committee were conducted on January 15, 2025, adding another layer to the dispute.
Legal Arguments and Final Ruling
During the court proceedings, Chief Standing Counsel Chandrashekhar Rawat and Government Advocate Naveen Tiwari presented arguments asserting that the director of education is indeed empowered under the Act to examine and address irregularities.
In its final ruling, the division bench modified the earlier single bench order. The court quashed the directive related to forming a committee to examine the election dispute from April 9. However, it explicitly permitted the inquiry into appointment-related irregularities to proceed without hindrance.
This judgment provides much-needed legal clarity for educational institutions, government authorities, and stakeholders involved in the administration of private schools in Uttarakhand. It delineates a clear procedural path for addressing different categories of management disputes, ensuring that the appropriate legal framework is applied to each specific issue.
