1. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 13.4.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition
preferred by the Appellant, challenging the order dated 27th September, 2010 whereby the objections filed by him was rejected by the District
Inspector of Schools, had been disposed of.
2. We have heard Sri V.K. Upadhyay, learned Counsel for the Appellant, learned Standing Counsel, who represents Respondent Nos. 1 and 2
and perused the impugned judgment and order dated 13.4.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge, giving rise to the present appeal, grounds
taken in the memo of appeal and documents filed along with the appeal.
3. Learned Counsel for the Appellant submitted that in the writ petition, apart from the order dated 27.9.2010, passed by the District Inspector of
Schools rejecting the Appellant''s objection, challenge was also made to the order dated 27.9.2011, passed by the District Inspector of Schools
whereby the newly constituted Committee of Management has been approved. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge had only went
upon the order dated 27.9.2010 insofar as it rejected the Appellant''s objection.
4. So far as the order passed by the learned Single Judge rejecting the writ petition by holding that the objection of the Appellant has rightly been
rejected by the District Inspector of Schools is concerned, we do not find any legal infirmity in the said order as the Appellant had contested the
election without raising any objection regarding the validity of the voter list, the nominations filed and the posts for which the elections were held
and after losing the elections had turned around to say that the elections were held on the basis of incorrect voter list, posts not provided in the
Scheme of Administration etc.
5. It is not clear as the whether the order approving the newly constituted Committee of Management was specifically questioned before the
learned Single or not.
6. Be that as it may, if the order rejecting the objection has been upheld then the necessary corollary is that newly constituted Committee of
Management has to be approved. We do not find any legal infirmity in the impugned judgment and order dated 13.4.2011.
7. The appeal fails and is dismissed.
8. Dismissed.
9. For orders, see order of date passed on separate sheets.
