1 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:175301

A.F.R.

Reserved on 21.08.2023.

Delivered on 06.09.2023.

Court No. - 10

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 11005 of 2023

Petitioner :- Anjuman Siddiquia Jamia Noorul Oloom And 4

Others

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Ami Tandon,Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

WITH

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5992 of 2023

Petitioner :- C/M Madarasa Islamiya And 12 Others

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 5 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajendra Kumar Yadav,Sr. Advocate

Counsel for Respondent :- CSC

Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

1.These two writ petitions, connected with each other, were

heard simultaneously and since they involve identical factual

2 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

and legal controversy, both are being decided by a common

judgment.

WRIT C No.11005 of 2023

THE CHALLENGE

2.This writ petition has been filed challenging an order

dated 09.01.2023 passed by the Special Secretary, Government

of U.P., Lucknow insofar as it pertains to the petitioners and

contains a direction for an action to be taken against them in

pursuance of a report dated 30.11.2022 submitted by the

Special Investigation Team (S.I.T.), as considered in the

meeting held on 19.12.2022. Further prayer is for quashing the

S.I.T. report itself to the extent it pertains to the petitioners and

also for quashing the Resolution dated 19.12.2022 passed in a

meeting headed by Chief Secretary of the State Government

whereby recommendation to accept the S.I.T. report has been

made. Another relief claimed is that the respondents may not

harass or take coercive measures against the petitioners.

FACTS OF THE CASE

3.The petitioner No.1-Anjuman Siddiquia Jamia Noorul

Oloom Munshipur, Mubarakpur, Azamgarh through its

Manager Mr. Zaheen Ahmad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Society’) registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860

(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act, 1860’), established a

Madarsa in the name and style of petitioner No.2- Madarsa

3 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Ashrafia Madintul Banat, Mubarakpur, Azamgarh (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Madarsa’) over the properties taken on lease

and sale; deeds annexed. After due verification, Madarsa was

registered under the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Board of

Madarsa Education Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act, 2004’) by a Registration Certificate dated 27.07.2011 and

the State Government introduced a Scheme named “Madarsa

Adhunikaran (Modernisation) Scheme” for providing teachers

to the Madarsas and to provide financial assistance to them for

the purposes of teaching different subjects and, under the said

Scheme, the petitioner No.2-Madarsa appointed three qualified

teachers, namely Kahakasha Parveen (petitioner No.3), Subi

Parveen (petitioner No.4) and Mohd. Shah Faizal (petitioner

No.5).

4.It is further pleaded that under the aforesaid Scheme, a

total sum of Rs.1,02,000/- was released by the State

Government in two strokes (Rs.30,000/- + Rs.72,000/-) by

31.01.2016 and the said amount was directly transferred to the

bank accounts of petitioner nos.3, 4 and 5, i.e. the teachers, and

its details were uploaded on the Portal of Madarsa and, later on,

due to various difficulties including financial crunch, a decision

to close down the Madarsa was taken and, during the said

course, a letter dated 31.07.2017 was written by the petitioners

to the respondent No.4-District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh to withdraw the Madarsa from the aforesaid Scheme

and, further, by another letter dated 27.11.2017, decision to

close down the Madarsa was communicated by the petitioner

4 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

No.2.-Madarsa to the respondent no.4 and, consequently, the

Madarsa stood finally closed in November, 2017.

THE ISSUE RAISED BY THE PETITIONERS

5.The issue raised is that the Special Investigation Team

(S.I.T.), constituted to examine various complaints against

Madarsa, submitted a report dated 30.11.2022 which was

placed before a Committee headed by Chief Secretary of the

State Government in its meeting dated 19.12.2022 and

proceedings of the said meeting disclose various actions

proposed to be taken against various Madarsas, including the

petitioner-Madarsa, which include lodging of F.I.R. against the

office bearers of the Madarsa under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468

and 471 I.P.C. The case of the petitioners is that the Madarsa-

Authorities were never provided any opportunity, either to

participate in the investigation conducted by the S.I.T. or before

passing of the Resolution dated 19.12.2022 or before accepting

the S.I.T. report and the Resolution under the impugned order

dated 09.01.2023. They have alleged the entire proceedings

having been undertaken in utter violation of principles of

natural justice, terming the same to be thoroughly ex-parte,

arbitrary, perverse, erroneous, discriminatory, unjustified and in

violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

DEFENCE IN COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

6.A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

respondents which has been sworn by the Additional

Superintendent of Police, State S.I.T., U.P., Lucknow and the

5 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

defence taken is that in furtherance of a letter dated 23.10.2020

issued by the Special Secretary, Home (Police) Anubhag-3,

U.P., Lucknow, on the basis of recommendations made by the

Director, Minority Welfare, U.P., Lucknow dated 12.07.2017,

during the course of verification of Madarsas uploaded on the

concerned portal of District Azamgarh, inquiry about 313

Madarsas was conducted and, having found various

unwarranted activities and anamolies, a decision to get the

investigation conducted through S.I.T. was taken and,

consequently, investigation was conducted by the S.I.T. and

following facts came into light, as pleaded by the respondents:-

I. During verification of uploaded Madarsa on the

Madarsa Portal in District-Azamgarh by the State

Special Investigation Team, U.P., Lucknow, upon the

investigation of 313 Madarsa being found against

standards. However, out of the aforesaid 313 Madarsa,

72 Madarsas have not been found to be as per standards.

Meaning thereby, they were running, but did not fulfill

various conditions in respect of recognition. These

Madarsas after many years, did not complete the

standards to fulfill the conditions for granting

recognition, they were not having any building or land.

As such, while committing grave negligence and

irregularities, these Madarsas have been granted

recognition by the concerned authorities. Hence a

recommendation has been made to withdraw the

recognition of these 72 Madarsas and to proceed with the

departmental proceedings against the employee/officer,

who has granted recognition.

6 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

II. During inquiry, out of 313 Madarsas, 219 Madarsas

have been found to be non existent. Meaning thereby, the

Madarsas are only running on papers. Actually, these

Madarsas, which have been shown to be run is only for

the purpose to embezzle the Government Aid. The

Madarsa Modernization Scheme started in the year

1994. Under the aforesaid scheme, in the name of the

abovenoted non existing Madarsas, how much fund has

been sanctioned, in this regard, the Minority Welfare

Department could not furnish full and satisfactory

information. Out of 313 Madarsa, which were under

inquiry, only for 8 Madarsas recognition file records

were made available only for the year 2014-15 and

2015-16. The amount, which has been paid to it, its

details have been made available.

III. The concerned departmental officer/employee in

collusion with the Manager and the Teachers of Modern

Subjects (in whose accounts the amount of honorarium

is being paid), while committing conspiracy, fabricating

and cheating, said forged Madarsas have been shown to

be run on papers and the Government Fund has been

embezzled. The Kendra Puronidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna, which is being run since about 25

years, apart from it for misuse of the Government Fund

and the scholarship to be paid to the minority students,

the important Government Records are missing. Along

with cancellation of withdrawal of the above-noted 219

non existing Madarsas, the employees/officers, who

have granted recognition to the total 219 Madarsas and

for missing of the records and embezzlement of the

Government Fund, a recommendation has been made to

register the prosecution against them. Along with it, for

7 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

the purpose to embezzle the Government Fund, above

219 non existing Madarsas, which are shown to be run

on papers only, a recommendation has been made to

lodge the prosecution against the Manager and the so

called Teachers (who have obtained honorarium in their

bank account).

IV. To end the problems of non existing and forged

Madarsas, for maintaining various process in respect of

granting recognition and aid to the Madarsas, Madarsa

Portal was launched in the year 2017. The Madarsas

were required to upload all information on Madarsa

Portal. The hardcopy of the information after uploading

the information on its Portal, after countersign along

with stamp was to be sent to the District Minority

Welfare Officer, so that the Madarsas could be verified

and after verification, the information, which has been

uploaded on the Portal of the Madarsas, the same could

be approved by the District Minority Welfare Officer.

Either the non existing Madarsas. did not upload the

information on the Portal or uploaded the part or false

information. In the Physical Verification made by the

District Minority Welfare Officer, Azamgarh, the forged

and non existing Madarsas in a large number were

found.”

7.Regarding the petitioner no.2-Madarsa, following factual

position has been pleaded by the respondents as per the S.I.T.

report:-

“6. That during inquiry, with regard to Madarsa

Asharfiya Madintul Banat Mubarakpur, Azmagarh

(Madarsa 1.D. 191200855), the following facts came

into the light:-

8 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

I. On 22.06.2011, the Madarsa has been

granted recognition at the level of 'Aliya'.

II. The Madarsa on its Portal had shown 3

rooms of Tahtaniya level of 300 Square Feet, 3

rooms of Fauquania of 300 Square Feet, 3

rooms of 300 Square Feet, 1 Principal Room of

150 Square Feet, 1 Library of 150 Square Feet

and 1 Office Room of 150 Square Feet, while in

the spot inspection, Madarsa has not been

found to be run, The Madarsa is non existing.

III. The Madarsa on Madarsa Portal had

shown 130 students of Tahtaniya Level, 92

students of Fauquania Level and 32 students of

Aliya, while on the spot, it could not be

verified. The Madarsa is non existing.

IV. Under the Modernization Staff on Madarsa

Portal by the Madarsa, three names of Modern

Teachers have been given i.e Kahkasha

Parveen, Shah Faisal and Subi Parveeen. The

details of payment chart is as under:-

1 WritCNoi.0 5Nf23ai.Nndd9R-1

क्र०लॉट

संख्या

मदरसे का

.io N d

आई०डी०

शिशक्षक

का नाम

भुगतान

की गयी

धनराशिश

खाता

संख्या

बैंक का

नाम

भुगतान

विदनांक

अपलोडर

का

ndd9R

,/Md9

का

ndd9R

901506मदरसा

अशरवि,या

मदीनतुल

बनात

मुबारकपुर

191200855

कहकशा

v9dl.

7200049550201

0006157

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

मो०

शाह

,ै शल

7200049550201

1007463

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

शूबी

v9dl.

7200049550201

1002789

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

कहकशा

v9dl.

3000049550201

0006157

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

मो०शाह

,ै शल

3000049550201

1007463

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

शूबी

v9dl.

3000049550201

1002789

य

ू०बी०

आई

अविमलो

28.03.

2017

इरशाद

अहमद

लालमन

क

ुल योग

3,06,000

V. The Madarsa after taking the printout of the

uploaded information from the Portal of

Madarsa, the Manager of the Madarsa did not

make available to the District Minority Welfare

Officer after singed and stamped.

VI . The Madarsa has not been locked by the

District Minority Welfare Officer on its portal

and along with it, the District Minority Welfare

Officer did not make available the file record of

recognition.

VII. On inspection, above-noted Madarsa has

been found to be non existing. File-record

relating to the recognition of Madarsa was also

not made available by the District Minority

10 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Welfare Officer, Azamgarh. The Manager of

the Madarsa has uploaded the false

information on the Madarsa Portal However,

as provided under the UP. Board of Madarsa

Education Act and rule thereunder, the

petitioners violated the conditions relating to

building, number of students and other

conditions relating to all recognition. Against

this non existing Madarsa, the Minority

Welfare Department, while 7 proceeding in

the matter as per rules At shall be

appropriate to withdraw recognition granted

to it.

VIII. The District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh under the Kendra Puronidhanit

Madarsa Adhunikikaran Madarsa Yojna, has

made available the amount to the Madarsas,

as per the information, for the various

periods of 2014-15 and 2015- 16. Under the

Kendra Puronidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Madarsa Yojna, for 2016-17,

Rs.3,06,000/- has been paid as honorarium to

the teachers of Modern Subjects i.e.

Kahkasha Parveen, Mohd. Shah Faizal and

Shubi Parveen in the Bank Accounts. It has

been approved by the then District Minority

Welfare Officer, Sri Lalman. Regarding this

non existing Madarsa, the Manager,

Ahmadullah in collusion with the then

District Minority Welfare Officer, Sri Lalman

and the Modemization Teachers, Kahkaasha

11 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Parveen, Mohd. Shah Faizal and Shubi

Parveen, embezzled the Government Aid.”

8.It has further been pleaded that in view of the above

report, decision to take criminal action against the erring

persons has been taken and an identical challenge was made by

certain teachers of some Madarsa by filing CRIMINAL MISC.

WRIT PETITION NO.1131 of 2023 (SMT. NESHAT FATMA

DAUDI AND OTHERS V. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL.

CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO. And OTHERS) before this Court

which was dismissed by a Division Bench vide order dated

09.02.2023. Regarding alleged ex-parte proceedings, reliance

has been placed upon Statement of Objects and Reasons of the

Act, 2004 as well as various powers conferred upon the State

Government including power under Section 13 of the Act,

2004. It has also been pleaded that the petitioners participated

in the enquiry proceedings but the Manager did not make

available relevant records nor were details found uploaded

during the course of Portal examination and also during spot

inspection and overall situation reveals that the Madarsa was

non-existent.

REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT

9.The petitioners’ rejoinder affidavit reiterates their stand

regarding proceedings being ex-parte with a further statement

that in the year 2016, an Inspection Committee headed by

Block Education Officer, Azamgarh was constituted which

carried out spot inspection and certified the existence of

12 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Madarsa in question and, only thereafter, the salaries of

petitioner nos. 3, 4 and 5 (teachers) were released. Reliance has

been placed upon an Inspection Memo dated 20.07.2016, a

copy whereof is said to have been served upon petitioners

under the R.T.I. Act under the signatures of District Minority

Welfare Officer, Azamgarh alongwith her letter dated

13.06.2023. Further reliance has been placed upon two interim

orders dated 11.04.2023 and 19.05.2023, respectively passed in

Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.3380 of 2023 (Jawed Aslam v.

State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lok Bhawan Lko.

And 4 others) and Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.4891 of

2023 (Lalman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief

Secy. Deptt. of Home and others), whereby a Co-ordinate

Bench of this Court has stayed the effect and operation of the

S.I.T. report as well as further proceedings in relation to the

concerned applicants.

10. I have heard Shri Anoop Trivedi, learned Senior

Advocate assisted by Shri Ami Tandon on behalf of the

petitioners and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional

Advocate General alongwith Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned

Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the State-

respondents.

11.During the course of arguments, this Court had taken on

record a copy of letter dated 25.08.2017 alongwith its

enclosures issued by the District Magistrate, Azamgarh to

various Authorities which was placed before the Court by the

petitioners and arguments on the same were also heard. This

13 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

fact is also noted in the order dated 21.08.2023 while reserving

the judgment.

CONTENTION OF PETITIONERS

12.Most of the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners

have already been noted in this judgement while referring to the

pleadings and, hence, need not to be repeated. In sum and

substance, the submission is that though the Madarsa was

rightfully established and recognized in the year 2011 and has

been closed down in the year 2017, any action taken or

proposed to be taken against the Madarsa or its authorities or

teachers, pursuant to the ex-parte report of S.I.T. is invalid and,

hence, not only the S.I.T. report but also the consequential

Resolution dated 19.12.2022 and its approval under the order

dated 09.01.2023 is invalid and unsustainable. The argument is

that S.I.T. has never allowed the petitioners to participate in the

enquiry and spot inspection was never carried out but the

decision has been taken only on the basis of portal information.

Further argument is that spot inspection was once carried out in

2016 (vide Annexure RA-1 to the rejoinder affidavit) where the

petitioner-Madarsa was found to be functional and, hence, the

ground taken in the impugned Resolution that in 2014-2015 and

2015-2016, the petitioner-Madarsa was not functional and

financial aid provided by the State Government was obtained

by manipulation is factually incorrect, and even the said spot

inspection report dated 20.07.2016 has not been taken into

consideration by the S.I.T.

14 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

CONTENTION OF RESPONDENTS

13.Per contra, it has been argued on behalf of the

respondents that S.I.T. conducted thorough investigation, both

based on portal information and spot inspection and found

Madarsa as non-existent and that the impugned Resolution

dated 19.12.2022 has been passed in the meeting held by the

State Government under the Chairmanship of Chief Secretary,

Ministry of Home Affairs, U.P. Government, in which, apart

from him, Additional Chief Secretary of Minority Welfare and

Waqf Department, U.P., Government and Director General of

Police, U.P. Lucknow were also present and signed the minutes

and decision of authorities of such high level cannot be lightly

challenged.

14. So far as the interim orders passed in the Applications U/

S 482 Cr.P.C. Nos.3380 of 2023 and 4891 of 2023 are

concerned, it has been argued that they were passed when the

criminal action was being taken against Registrar of the

Madarsa Board and another Official and, taking note of the

interim order dated 19.04.2023, passed by this Court in the

present Writ C No.11005 of 2023, Resolution dated 19.12.2022

and the S.I.T. report dated 30.11.2022 as well as further

consequential proceedings, insofar as the same related to the

applicants of the said applications were stayed. It has further

been argued that the stay order passed in aforesaid applications

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. would be of no avail as the challenge

made to the S.I.T. report dated 30.11.2022 as well as impugned

decision dated 09.01.2023 taken by the Government approving

the Resolution dated 19.12.2022 has already been turned down

15 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

by the Division Bench of this Court in the order dated

09.02.2023 passed in the Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1131

of 2023. Relevant portions of the S.I.T. report and conclusion

drawn by the S.I.T. during the investigation and also the

Resolution dated 19.12.2022 were pressed with vehemence on

behalf of the State and, as regards the pleadings contained on

record, it was also argued that once specific details in relation

to the non-existence of the petitioner-Madarsa were spelt out in

various sub-paragraphs of ‘paragraph 6’ of the counter affidavit,

the same have not been denied in the rejoinder affidavit and,

only this much has been stated in ‘paragraph 10’ of the

rejoinder affidavit that contents of ‘paragraphs 6 (I), (II), (III)

and (IV) of the counter affidavit are matter of record and need

no reply.

15.The submission is that Division Bench final order dated

09.02.2023 shall prevail over interim orders passed by the

learned Single Judge in Applications U/S 482 Cr.P.C. Nos.3380

of 2023 and 4891 of 2023 and, even otherwise, the interim

orders were only in relation to the Officials of the Madarsa

Board and have no concern with the petitioners and were

passed without taking into considerstion the order dated

09.02.2023.

16.With regard to the power of the State Government to take

action, reliance has been placed on Section 13 of the Act, 2004

and it has also been argued that the writ petition is premature

as, till today, neither the recognition granted to the petitioner-

Madarsa has been withdrawn nor cancelled nor has any

16 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

criminal action been taken against the petitioners and, further,

the report of S.I.T., even otherwise, cannot be quashed in writ

jurisdiction.

17.Rival contentions shall be dealt with by this Court after

the factual matrix of connected Writ C No.5992 of 2023 (C/M

Madarasa Islamiya And 12 Others v. State Of U.P. And 5

Others) is discussed.

WRIT-C No. 5992 of 2023

THE CHALLENGE

18.This writ petition has been filed by the Committee of

Management of 13 Madarsas and prayers made therein are

more or less identical to the prayers made in Writ-C No.11005

of 2023 except that there is no challenge to the S.I.T. report.

FACTS OF THE CASE

19. In this writ petition, reliance has been placed upon

various documents to establish that in the years 2008, 2009,

2010, due recognition was granted to the Madarsas, teachers

were appointed and were paid honorarium with the aid of State

Government, and the case is that in an arbitrary manner and

without providing any opportunity to the petitioners, impugned

Resolution dated 19.12.2022 was passed and approved by the

State Government on 09.01.2023.

17 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

20. A counter affidavit has been filed which has been sworn

by the Additional Superintendent of Police, State S.I.T., U.P.,

Lucknow, in which, validity of proceedings undertaken by the

S.I.T. has been pleaded with reference to the steps taken in

respect of various Madarsas and pleadings, as they are, are

reproduced below:-

“7. That during inquiry with regard to Madarsa

Islamiya Niswas Samaisa Pawai, Azamgarh following

facts came to light:-

I . That on 08.09.2008, said Madarsa was

given temporary recognition by the then

District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh, Sri Prabhat Kumar along with

Clerk, Waqf Om Prakash Pandey and Waqf

Inspector Munnar Ram.

II. That on Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of

300 Square Feet of Tahtaniya Level and

105 students of Tahtaniya Level were

shown and after receiving printout of

uploaded information by Madarsa the

team of District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh inspected the Madarsa.

Madarsa was not existing, all the

information was given by the Madarsa

was found to be incorrect, in fact, no

Madrasa was existing.

18 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

III. The District Minority Welfare Officer

did not lock the Madarsa on Portal and

further he did not make available the

record file of recognition.

IV. That the Manager of Madarsa

uploaded false information and did not

fulfill the requisite requirement of grant of

recognition.

V. That for this non existing Madarsa

Rs.3,45,000/- was made available under

the Kendra Puramidhannit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna by the District

Minority Welfare Officer, Azamgarh,

which was in collusion with Manager of

Madarsa and was paid to the

Adhunikikaran Teachers, Sadhna Yadav,

Sumita and Sarita in the year 2016-17 for

the period of 2014-15 and 2015-16 and

thus embezzled the Government Fund.

8. That during the inquiry, the inquiry with regard to

Madarsa Modern Public School, Takiya Gulam Ali

Shah Samisa, Pawai Azmagarh following facts came

to light:-

I. That on 22.01.2009, the said Madarsa was

given temporary recognition by the then District

Minority Welfare Officer, Azamgarh, Sri Prabhat

Kumar, Waqf Clerk, Om Prakash Pandey and

Waqf Inspector, Munnar Ram.

19 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

II. That on Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of 300

Square feet was shown for Fauquaniya level

whereas on spot 3 rooms of 200 square feet as

school is running beside which Madarsa was

said to have been running. For the running of

Madarsa at Fauquaniya Level requirement of 6

rooms and 2 office room is necessary. Madarsa

was found non existing.

III. That on Portal Zero student of Tahtaniya

level and 115 students of FAuquaniya Level

was shown but on inspection, it was not found

and Madarsa was non existent.

IV. That in the name of Madarsa Public

School was running, which showed that there

was no Madarsa in existence.

V. That after getting printout of uploaded

information, the District Minority Welfare

Officer and his team inspected the Madarsa,

but he did not lock the Madarsa on Portal

and further he did not make available the

file record of recognition of Madarsa.

VI. That the Madarsa was not existing, the

Manager uploaded wrong information on

Madarsa Potal.

VII. That for this non existent Madarsa,

Rs.56,000/- was made available under the

Kendra Puronidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna by the District Minority

20 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Welfare Officer, Azamgarh, which was in

collusion with Manager Raunak and was

paid to the Adhunikikaran teacher Vinod

Kumar Yadav Motilal and Sangita in the year

2016-17 for the period fo 2014-15 and 2015-

16 and thus embezzled the Government Fund

9. That during inquiry with regard to Madarsa

Islamiya Imam Ali Razzakpur, Pawai, Azamgarh,

following facts came into light:-

I. The said Madarsa was recognized on

26.06.2009 at Fauquaniya level and on the

Madarsa Portal 3 rooms 300 square meters

was shown at Fauquaniya level, but on

inspection there was no Madarsa instead one

resident house was found under one Tin

Shade. There was one car and 2 small rooms

were found. No display Board was found. It

was also said that 2 recognized Madarsa was

running therein one house. This Madarsa was

not existing.

II. That on Portal zero student of Tahtaniya

Level and 102 students of Fauquaniya level

was shown by it, was not verified on spot

and the Madarsa was found non existent.

After inspection the District Minority

Welfare Officer did not lock the Madarsa on

Portal.

21 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

III. That Rs.66,000/- was paid to the teachers

namely, Tabassum, Mohd. Wasim and

Shahanwaz Alam in collusion with District

Minority Welfare Officer, Lalman Manager

Kamaruddin, hence there was embezzlement

of Government Fund found.

10. That during inquiry with regard to sMadarsa

Amina Nishwan Razzakpur, Pawai, Azamgarh

following facts came to light:-

I. That on 08.09.2008, the said Madarsa

was accorded temporary recognition at

Tahtaniya Level. On the Madarsa Portal, 3

rooms of 300 Square Feet of Tahtaniya

Level was shown but on spot inspection no

Madarsa was found. One residence was

shown where a four wheeler was standing

there in the garage. 2 small rooms were

found. There was no display board on

Madarsa.

II. That 150 students of Tahtaniya Level

was shown on Portal, but on spot

inspection no Madarsa with 150 students

was found. The Madarsa was not existing.

III. That no record file of recognition was

made available by the District Minority

Welfare Officer and the Manager

Kamaluddin had uploaded wrong

information on the Portal.

22 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

IV. That Rs.66,000/- was made available

to the Madarsa in connivance with

Manager by the District Minority Welfare

Officer, Azamgarh under Kendra

Puronidhanit Madarsa Adhunikikaran

Yojna, which was paid to teachers Amina

Khatoon, Sushma and Tarul. Thus, for non

existing Madarsa, Government Fund was

embezzled by the Manager Kamaluddin,

Teachers and District Minority Welfare

Officer, Azamgarh.

11. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Ashrafiya Niswan Mahul, Azamgarh following facts

came into light:-

I. That the said Madarsa was given

temporary recognition at Tahtaniya Level on

8th September, 2008. At Madarsa Portal 3

rooms of 300 Square Feet, one Principal

room of 150 Square Feet one Office room of

150 Square Feet were shown. whereas, on

spot there was no Madarsa running and the

Madarsa was not existing.

II. That 130 students of Tahtaniya Level was

shown on the Madarsa Portal, but on

inspection, no student was found. The

Madarsa was not existing.

III. That no printout of information on

Portalwas handed over to the District

Minority Welfare Officer, Azamgarh by the

23 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Manager Ahtsham Ahmad Khan. The

District Minority Welfare Officer, Azamgarh

did not lock on Portal and record of

recognition was also made available.

IV. That the Manager thus uploaded wrong

information on the Madarsa Portal and in

collusion with District Minority Welfare

Officer under Kendra Puronidhanit

Madarsa Adhunikikaran Yojna in 2016-17

year for the year 2014-15 and 2015-16

receives Rs.66,000/- and paid in the Bank

Account of teachers Shabana Bano, Alsha

bano and Nahid Fatma. Thus, the Manager

Ahtsham Ahmad Khan, District Minority

Welfare Officer, Azamgarh, Sri Lalman and

above- noted teachers embezzled the

Government Fund.

12. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Noor Islam Shikshan Sansthan, Khalispur, Azamgarh,

following facts came into light:-

I. That said Madarsa was given temporary

recognition of Tahtaniya Level as on the

Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of 300 Square

Feet, I office room of 150 Square Feet were

shown but on the spot a public school was

running. From the statement of nearby

public there was no Madarsa was running,

but a school other than Madarsa was

running. On the spot, Dr. Ambedkar Public

24 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

School was running in short VAHSS was

written. The Madarsa was not existing.s

II. That on Madarsa Portal wrongfully 134

students of Tahtaniya Level was shown, but

on spot Public School was running and

Madarsa was not existing.

III. That by the District Minority Welfare

Officer, District- Azamgarh in collusion

with Manager, who uploaded wrong

information on the Madarsa Portal

Rs.80,000/- was paid to Madarsa for

Kendra Puronidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna in the year 2016-17

for the year 2014-15 and 2015-16 and was

paid in the Bank Account of Teacher of

non existing Madarsa Nirmala Kumar,

Vimla Devi and Ram Samujh Yadav. Thus,

embezzlement of Government Fund is

proved.

13. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Ashfaq Ullah, Dhankatiya, Azamgarh following facts

came into light:-

I. That the said Madarsa was given

temporary recognition of Tahtaniya Level

and on the Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of

300 Square Feet was shown, but on spot

Public School was running. The Madaras

was not existing.

25 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

II. That on the Madarsa Portal 133

students of Tahtaniya Level was shown

but on spot Public School was running.

The Madarsa was not existing.

III. That on the Madarsa Portal, the

District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh did not lock and for

Adhunikikarn Staff, who were shown on

Madarsa Portal, Rs.55,000/- was paid in

the Bank Account of teachers Sanjay

Kumar, Vimla Devi and Rajesh Kumar

Maurya. The Madarsa was not existing

and thus the Manager Alim Ali in

collusion with District Minority Welfare

Officer, Lalman along with

Adhunikikaran Teachers embezzled the

Government Fund in the year 2016-17 for

the years 2014-15 and 2015-16.

14. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Kair Saheb, Ibrahimpur, Sathiyaon, Azamgarh,

following facts came to light:-

I. That on 10.06.2008, the said Madarsa

was given temporary recognition at

Tahtaniya Level.

II. That on the Madarsa Portal, 3 rooms of

300 Square Feet and 127 students of

Tahtaniya Level were found at the given

address. The Madarsa is not existing.

26 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

III. That neither the Madarsa was locked

on Portal nor recognition paper was made

available by the District Minority Welfare

Officer, Azamgarh.

IV. That the Manager Alim Ali in collusion

with District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh, Sri Lalman got payment of

Rs.4,43,000/- in the year 2016-17 for the

year 2014-15 and 2016-16 in the name of

Kendra Puronidhaunit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna and was paid in the

Bank Account of non existing Madarsa

Teachers Suman Lal, Ranjana Yadav,

Parwati Devi and Reema Bharti and thus

embezzled the Government Fund.

15. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Noor Islam Niswan Shikshan Sansthan, Khalispur,

Azamgarh, following facts came into light:-

I. That on 26.09.2009, the said Madarsa was

granted temporary recognition at Fauquaniya

Level. On the Madarsa Portal, 3 rooms of 300

Square Feet 1 room of 150 Square Feet were

shown at Fauquaniya Level, whereas on spot a

Public School was running. From the

statements of people of locality it was

informed that VAHSS named school in

running. There was no Madarsa and

Madarasa was nonexistent.

27 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

II. That it was stated by the Management

persons that 2 Madarsas were running. On

Madarsa Portal Zero student of Tahtaniya

Level and 97 students of Fauquaniya Level

were shown whereas on spot inspection,

Public School was running. The Madarsa was

not existing.

III. That on Madarsa Portal under the head

of Adhunikikaran Staff 3 teachers namely

Shailesh Kumar, Ravindra Kumar and Amina

Khatoon were shown and Rs.1,68,000/- was

paid under Kendra Puronidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna for the non existing

Madarsa with connivance of Manager

Mozibul Gaffar with District Minority

Welfare Officer, Azamgarh Sri Lalman and

the said teachers. The Government Fund was

embezzled.

IV. The Madarsa was also not locked on

Portal of the District Minority Welfare

Officer, nor recognition record file was made

available.

16. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Ashfaq Ullah Niswan Shikshan Sansthan, Bahkaliya,

Azamgarh following facts came to light:-

I. That the said Madarsa was granted

temporary recognition of Fauquaniya Level

and on the Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of 300

Square Feet and 100 students of Tahtaniya

28 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Level and 85 students of Fauquaniya Level

were seen.

II. That on the spot no Madarsa was found

from the statement of people locality an

English Medium school was running and no

Madarsa was existing.

III. That under the head of Adhunikikaran Staff

names of 3 teachers were shown on the Portal

i.e. Azad Kumar Gautam, Ramayan Singh and

Praveen Kumar, who have received

Rs.2,60,000/- in their Bank Account in the year

2016-17 for the period of 2 years i.e. 2014-15

and 2015-16.

IV. That the District Minority Welfare Officer

did not lock the Madarsa on Portal and in

collusion with Manager Mozibol Gaffar with

teachers embezzled the Government Fund.

17. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Arbiya Talima) Kuran Gahni, Mirzapur, Azamgarh,

following facts came into light-

I. That on 20.06.2009, the said Madarsa

was granted temporary recognition of

Fatuaniya Level and on the Madarsa Portal

Fauquaniya Level 2 rooms of 300 Square

Feet, Tahtaniya Level 3 rooms of 300

Square Feet were found, which were not of

standard of level prescribed for. In the

29 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

nearby rooms, domestic goods were found.

Madarsa was not existing.

II. That on the Madarsa Portal 131 students

of Fauquaniya Level were shown, which not

found on spot. The Madarsa was not

existent.

III. That Madarsa on the Portal was locked

by the District Minority Welfare Officer nor

recognition record file was made available

by him. The Manager has uploaded false

information on Madarsa Portal.

IV. That the Manager of the alleged Madarsa

Naseem Ahmad in collusion with District

Minority Welfare Officer, Sri Lalman under

the Kendra Purovidhanit Madarsa

Adhunikikaran Yojna, received the account of

Adhunik Teachers namely, Kausar, Homa

Bano and Sufiya Bano to the tune of

Rs.3,45,000/- in the year 2016-17 for the

period of 2014-15 and 2015-16. Thus, they

embezzled the Government Fund.

18. That during the enquiry with regard to Madarsa

Kamarunnisha, Balaipur, Pawai, Azamgarh, following

facts came into light:-

I. That on 22.01.2009, the said Madarsa was

granted temporary recognition of Fauquaniya

Level. On the Madarsa Portal 3 rooms of 225

Square Feet of Fauquaniya Level, 1 office room

30 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

225 Square Feet were shown whereas on spot

only 3 rooms and one office room of 150 Square

Feet were found, which were not upto standard

prescribed for granting recognition.

II. That on the Madarsa Portal 102 students of

Fauquaniya Level were shown, but on spot it is

not verified and the Madarsa was found non

existing.

III. The Madaras was not locked on the Portal

by the District Minority Welfare Officer,

Azamgarh nor recognition record file was made

available by him.

IV. That for the said Madarsa under the Kendra

Purovidhanit Madarsa Adhunikikaran Yojna

was given Rs.1,68,000/- in the account of

teachers of Modern Subject namely Vinod Soni

Isliyak Ahmad and Savita in collusion with

Manager and District Minority Welfare Officer,

Sri Lalman and thus embezzled the Government

Fund.”

21.By taking the aforesaid stand, impugned action has been

stated to be justified on the same lines on which its justification

has been pleaded in the counter affidavit against Writ C No.

11005 of 2023.

REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT

31 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

22.The petitioners’ rejoinder affidavit reiterates their stand

taken in the writ petition and the entire thrust is upon ex-parte

nature of decision.

23.I have heard Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel

assisted by Shri Rajendra Kumar Yadav on behalf of petitioners

in this writ petition and Shri Manish Goyal, learned Additional

Advocate General alongwith Shri I.P. Srivastava, learned

Additional Chief Standing Counsel on behalf of the State-

respondents.

CONTENTION OF PETITIONERS

24.The submission of Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior

Counsel, is that the impugned decision entails serious civil

consequences and, therefore, adherence to the principles of

natural justice was must; that the S.I.T. report can never be

treated as a substantive piece of evidence and, since the

Government, in the impugned Resolution dated 19.12.2022, has

already recommended for taking action against the petitioners,

nothing remains for any Authority at any level, be it

administrative or police, to take a different view of the matter

and the S.I.T. report would always be treated as conclusive in

all the proceedings and the petitioners would stand nowhere. It

has further been argued that under the Scheme For Providing

Education in Madarsas/Minorities (S.P.E.M.M.), fixed

honorarium was to be paid to the teachers teaching modern

subjects in such Madarsas and all the petitioners-Madarsas

stood identified for disbursement of honorarium; at no point of

32 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

time any such aspect was properly analyzed; the petitioners

were not heard in relation to the allegations made; wrong and

perverse conclusion has been drawn in the impugned

Resolution dated 19.12.2022 and the nature of the impugned

decision is that finality has been attached to the unlawful

activities of the petitioners and nothing remains for further

adjudication.

CONTENTION OF THE RESPONDENTS

25.In opposition to this writ petition also, the arguments on

behalf of the State-respondents are identical, as already noted in

relation to Writ C No.11005 of 2023.

ANALYSIS OF RIVAL CONTETIONS IN

BOTH THE PETITIONS

26.Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length,

before dealing with the factual aspects involved in these

matters, the provisions of U.P. Board of Madarsa Education

Act, 2004 need a discussion. The said Act came into force on

03.12.2004. Sections 2(a), 2(d) and 2(j) define respectively,

“Board”, “Head of Institution” and “recognition” in the

following manner:-

“Section 2(a). “Board” means the Uttar Pradesh Board of

Madarsa Education established under Section 3;

(d). “Head of institution,” in relation to and institution

means the Principal or the Head Master, as the case may be,

of that institution.”

33 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(j). “Recognition” means recognition for the purpose of

preparing candidates for admission to the Board’s

Examination;”

27.The constitution of the Board is provided under Section 3

of the Act, 2004 which reads as follows:-

“3. Constitution of the Board.-(1) With effect from such

date as the State Government may, by notification, appoint,

there shall be established at Lucknow a Board to be known

as the Uttar Pradesh Board of Madarsa-Education.

(2) The Board shall be a body corporate.

(3) The Board shall consist of the following members

namely:

(a) a renowned Muslim educationist in the filed of

traditional Madarsa-Education, nominated by the State

Government who shall be the Chairperson of the Board;

(b) the Director, who shall be the Vice-Chairperson of

the Board;

(c) the Principal, Government Oriental College,

Rampur;

(d) one Sunni-Muslim Legislator to be elected by

both houses of the State Legislature;

(e) one Shia-Muslim Legislator to be elected by both

houses of the State Legislature;

(f) one representative of National Council of

Educational Research and Training;

(g) two head of institution established and

administered by Sunni-Muslim nominated by the

State Government;

34 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(h) one head of institution established and

administered by Shia-Muslim nominated by the State

Government;

(i) two teachers of institutions established and

administered by Sunni-Muslim nominated by the

State Government;

(j) one teacher of an institution established and

administered by Shia-Muslim nominated by the State

Government;

(k) one Science or Tibb teacher of an institution

nominated by the State Government;

(l) the Account and Finance Officer in the

Directorate of Minority Welfare, Uttar Pradesh;

(m) the Inspector;

(n) an officer not below the rank of Deputy Director

nominated by the State Government, who shall be the

member Registrar.”

28.The functions of the Board are defined under Section 9 of

the Act, 2004 and its powers under Section 10 in the following

manner:-

“9. Functions of the Board.- Subject to the other

provisions of this Act, the Board shall have the

following functions, namely-

(a) to prescribe course of instructions text-books, other

books and instructional material, if any, for Tahtania,

Fauquania, munshi, Maulavi, Alim, Kamil, Fazil and

other courses;

35 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(b) prescribe the course books, other books and

instruction material of courses of Arbi, Urdu and

Pharsi for classes upto High School and Intermediate

standard in accordance with the course determined

there for by' the Board of High School and

Intermediate Education;

(c) to prepare manuscript of the course books other

books and instruction material referred to in clause (b)

by excluding the matters therein wholly or partiality or

otherwise and to publish them;

(d) prescribe standard for the appointment of Urdu

translators in the various offices of the State and

ensure through the appointing authority necessary

action with respect to filling up of the vacant posts;

(e) to grant Degrees, Diplomas, Certificates or other

academic distinctions to persons, who-

(i) have pursued a course of study in an institution

admitted to the privileges or recognition by the Board;

(ii) have studied privately under conditions laid down

in the regulations and have passed an examination of

the Board under like conditions;

(f) to conduct examinations of the Munshi, Maulavi,

Alim and of Kamil and Fazil courses;

(g) to recognise institutions for the purposes of its

examination;

36 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(h) to admit candidates to its examination;

(i) to demand and receive such fee as may be

prescribed in the regulations;

(j) to publish or withhold publication of the result of its

examinations wholly or in part;

(k) to co-operate with other authorities in such

manner and for such purposes as the Board may

determine;

(l) to call for reports from the Director on the

condition of recognised institutions or of institutions

applying for recognition;

(m) to submit to the State Government its views on

any matter with which it is concerned;

(n) to see the schedules of new demands proposed to

be included in the budget relating to institutions

recognised by it and to submit if it thinks fit, its views

thereon for the consideration of the State Government;

(o) to do all such other acts and things as may be

requisite in order to further the objects of the Board as

a body constituted for regulating and supervising

Madarsa-Education upto Fazil;

(p) to provide for research or training in any branch

of Madarsa Education viz, Darul Uloom Nav Uloom,

Lucknow, Madarsa Babul Ilm, Mubarakpur,

Azamgarh, Darul Uloom Devband, Saharanpur,

37 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Oriental College Rampur and any other institution

which the State Government may notify time to time.

(q) to constitute a committee at district level

consisting of not less than three members for

education upto Tahtania or Faukania standard, to

delegate such committee the power of giving

recognition to the educational institutions under its

control it.

(r) to take all such steps as may be necessary or

convenient for or as may be incidental to the

exercise of any power, or the performance or

discharge of any function or duty, conferred or

imposed on it by this Act.

10. Powers of the Board.- (1) The Board shall

subject to the provisions of this Act and the rules

made thereunder, have all such powers as may be

necessary' for the performance of its functions and

the discharge of its duties under this Act, or the rules

or regulations made thereunder.

(2) In particular and without prejudice to the

generality of the foregoing powers, the Board shall

have the powers,-

(i) to cancel an examination or withhold the result of

an examination of a candidate, or to disallow him

from appearing at any future examination who is

found by it to be guilty of,-

(a) using unfair means in the examination; or

38 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(b) making any incorrect statement or suppressing

material information or fact in the application form for

admission to the examination, or

(c) fraud or impersonation at the examination: or

(d) securing admission to the examination in

contravention of the rules governing admission to such

examination; or

(e) any act of gross indiscipline in the course of the

examination;

(ii) to cancel the result of an examination of any

candidate for all or any of the acts mentioned in sub-

clauses (a) to (d) of clause

(i) or for any bona fide error of the Board in the

declaration of the result;

(iii) to prescribe fees for the examinations conducted by

it and provide for the mode of its realisation;

(iv) to refuse recognition of an institution,-

(a) which does not fulfil, or is not in a position to

fulfil, or does not come upto, the standards for staff,

instructions, equipment or buildings laid down by the

Board in this behalf; or

(b) which does not, or is not, willing to abide by the

conditions of recognition laid down by the Board in

this behalf:

39 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(v) to withdraw recognition of an institution not able

to adhere to, or make provisions for, standards of

staff, instructions, equipment or buildings laid down

by the Board or on its failure to observe the conditions

of recognition to the satisfaction of the Board;

(vi) to call for reports from the head of institution in

respect of any act of contravention of the rules or

regulations of decisions, instructions or directions of

the Board and take suitable actions for the

enforcement of the rules or regulations decisions,

instructions or directions of the Board, in such

manner as may be prescribed by regulations;

(vii) to inspect an institution for the purpose of

ensuring due observance of the prescribed courses of

study and that the facilities for instructions are duly

provided and availed of; and

(vii) to fix the maximum number of students that may be

admitted to a course of study in an institution.

(3) The decision of the Board in all matters mentioned

in sub-sections (1) and (2) shall be final.”

29.Insofar as the powers of State Government are concerned,

the same are contained under Section 13 of the Act which reads

as follows:-

“13. Power of the State Government.- (1) The State

Government shall have the right to address the Board

with reference to any work conducted or done by the

40 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Board and to communicate to the Board its views on

any matter with which the Board is concerned.

(2) The Board shall report to the State Government

such action, if any, as it is proposed to be or has been

taken upon its communication.

(3) If the Board does not, within a reasonable time take

action to the satisfaction of the State Government, the

State Government may after considering any

explanation furnished or representation made by the

Board, issue such directions consistent with this Act, as

it may think fit, and the Board shall comply with such

direction.

(4) Whenever, in the opinion of the State Government, it

is necessary or expedient to take immediate action, it may

without making any reference to the Board under the

foregoing provisions, pass such order or take such other

action consistent with this Act as it deems necessary and

in particular, may by such order, modify or rescind or

make any regulation in respect of any matter and shall

forthwith inform the Board accordingly.

(5) Any action taken by the State Government under sub-

section (4) shall not be called in question in any court. “

30.A composite reading of afore-quoted sections of the Act,

2004 makes it clear that the Board, which comprises of many

officers, performs various functions including a function to

recognize institutions and to call for reports from the Director

of Minority Welfare, U.P. on the conditions of recognized

41 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

institutions or of the institutions applying for recognition. The

Board also has a power to refuse recognition as per Section

10(2)(iv) of the Act, 2004 and to withdraw recognition as per

Section 10(2)(v) of the Act, 2004, as per the contingencies

enumerated therein. The Act further empowers the Board to call

for the reports from the Heads of the Institutions and carry out

requisite inspections and also to take suitable actions for

enforcement of the Rules, Regulations, decisions, instructions

or directions of the Board.

31. Insofar as the inter-se role of Board and State

Government is concerned, Section 13 of the Act clearly vests

the State Government with a right to address the Board with

reference to any work conducted or done by the Board and to

communicate to the Board its views on any matter with which

the Board is concerned and, thereafter, the Board is under

obligation to report to the State Government about any such

action taken or proposed to be taken upon communication with

a further provision that the State Government may, after

considering any explanation furnished or representation made

by the Board, issue directions consistent with the Act, 2004

which would be complied by the Board.

32.In view of the above, neither the Board nor the State

Government is powerless or functionless, in case, any illegality,

irregularity, flaw, mischief, misrepresentation etc. comes to

their knowledge by any means whatsoever, which may infer

that either recognition was wrongfully granted to any Madarsa

or, even if rightly granted, the conditions of recognition are

42 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

being violated or it is not fit, either in the opinion of the Board

or the State Government, that the recognition should continue

for an indefinite period of time.

33.In the light of the aforesaid provisions, I find that if the

State Government constituted a Special Investigation Team to

carry out inspection, either through spot inspection, physical

verification or even through Portal information uploaded by the

Board, its action cannot be said to be unjustified.

34. The question, therefore, arises as to whether the

impugned S.I.T. report or the Resolution dated 19.12.2022 or its

approval dated 09.01.2023, being allegedly ex-parte, would, in

any manner, affect the interest of the petitioners or that doors of

justice stand closed for them for all time to come. Insofar as the

petitioners of Writ C No.11005 of 2023 are concerned, the

submission that the concerned Madarsa has already been closed

down in 2017 for various reasons, is not relevant as mere

closure of Madarsa, either permanently or temporarily, would

not mean that its recognition has lapsed or that action to

withdraw recognition cannot be taken or that anything done

prior to its closure loses its significance for one or the other

purposes.

35. As regards adherence of principles of natural justice,

though the S.I.T. has reported that it had conducted spot

inspection and the concerned Madarsas were found non-

existent and that the office bearers of the Madarsa could not

furnish necessary details in any manner, even if, the submission

43 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

advanced on behalf of the petitioners that the investigation

conducted by the S.I.T. was ex-parte, is accepted for the sake of

argument, the Court finds that since the issue relates to

withdrawal of or taking any action against the Madarsas, such

power to withdraw vests in the Board as per Section 10 of the

Act, 2004 and the State Government’s role is spelt out under

Section 13 of the Act, 2004. Certainly, the language of said

Section makes it clear that the Government has right to address

the Board and to communicate to the Board its views on any

matter, with which the Board is concerned and, as a matter of

fact, there are provisions for intra-departmental or inter

departmental communication in between the State Government

and the Board.

36. Therefore, if the constitution of the Special Investigation

Team or enquiry/investigation conducted by it is examined in

the light of the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioners

associated with alleged violation of principles of natural justice,

the Court finds that the State Government is well empowered to

take immediate action consistent with the Act, 2004 without

even making any reference to the Board under certain emergent

circumstances, even the principles of natural justice may be

diluted, if at all the same have been allegedly violated, as

contended by the petitioners. In this regard reference to a

decision of the Supreme Court in the case of UOI v. J.N. Sinha

and another reported in A.I.R. 1971 Supreme Court 40 can be

made where the Apex Court, while dealing with the issue of

alleged violation of principles of natural justice in relation to

statutory provisions, observed that it is true that if a statutory

44 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

provision can be read consistently with the principles of natural

justice, the Courts should do so because it must be presumed

that the legislatures and the statutory authorities intend to act in

accordance with the principles of natural justice. But, if on the

other hand a statutory provision either specifically or by

necessary implication excludes the application of any or all

the rules of the principles of natural justice then the Court

cannot ignore the mandate of the legislature or the statutory

authority and read into the concerned provision the

principles of natural justice. Whether the exercise of a power

conferred should or should not be made in accordance with any

of the principles of natural justice depends upon the express

words of the provision conferring the power, the nature of the

power conferred, the purpose for which it is conferred and the

effect of the exercise of that power.

37. Therefore, the Court also observes that if, at all, violation

of principles of natural justice, has been committed while

conducting investigation by the SIT, though a contrary stand

has been taken by the respondents, as already elaborately

discussed, adherence/non-adherence of principles of natural

justice can be understood in the light of implied exclusion of

such provision to some extent under various subsections of

Sections 13 and express inclusion under Section 10 (2) (vi) of

the Act, 2004, and hence, if the Board proposes to take an

action under Section 10 of the Act, 2004, it may call for reports

from the Head of the Institution and consider the representation

made by the Institution and sufficient protection has already

been accorded as per the judgment/order of the Division Bench

45 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

dated 09.02.2023. Further, section 10(2)(vi) of the Act, 2004

read with other provisions of the Act, 2004 contain provision

for granting opportunity to Head of the Institution, if any act of

contravention of the Rules or Regulations etc. is alleged and,

therefore, in view of the liberty granted by the Division Bench

in the judgment dated 09.02.2023 passed in Criminal Misc.

Writ Petition No.1131 of 2023, I find that petitioners have

ample opportunity to raise their grievances before the

concerned Authorities by way of making

applications/representations and taking all such pleas which

may be available to them and enclosing therewith all the

documents which they intend to rely on and, once such

application or representation is preferred, the Competent

Authority would take into consideration the same and pass

appropriate orders at appropriate stages with due

communication to the petitioners also.

38.As regards the action against the concerned petitioners

pursuant to the impugned Resolution is concerned, while I find

that the Resolution contains various tables out of which, the

first table relates to description of 219 non-existent Madarsas

and the Officers granting recognition to them, in which, the

petitioner no.2-Madarsa of Writ C No.11005 of 2023 is

included, the second table relates to 39 non-existent Madarsas,

in relation whereto, allegations of mis-appropriation and

embezzlement of Government fund have been levelled and

petitioner no.2-Madarsa of Writ C No.11005 of 2023 is

included therein with a disclosure that a sum of Rs.1,06,000/-

was mis-appropriated as honorarium. Third table relates to 180

46 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Madarsas, in relation whereto, criminal prosecution has been

proposed, however, description of petitioner no.2 does not find

mention in the same and the fourth table refers to description of

Madarsas and Officers of sub-standard Madarsas, in which, also

petitioner no.2-Madarsa is not there. Insofar as the petitioners

of Writ C No.5992 of 2023 are concerned, it is pleaded in

‘paragraph 29’ of the said writ petition that they are included in

the list of 39 Madarsas and on the allegations, criminal

prosecution has been recommended.

39.The Court has already referred to an order dated

09.02.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1131 of 2023 and, at this stage,

the said order needs to be reproduced as such:-

“Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

learned State counsel.

By means of this writ petition filed under Article

226 of the Constitution of India, a prayer has been

made to quash the Government order dated

09.01.2023, which has been enclosed as Annexure

No.1 to the writ petition, whereby, the State

government has required the Director General of

Police (Special Investigating Team) to take

appropriate action on the basis of a preliminary

inquiry conducted by the Special Investigating

Team, which has submitted its report on 30.11.2022.

For challenging the said Government order,

submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is

two fold.

47 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Firstly he has argued that the Special Investigating

Team before furnishing its report dated 30.11.2022

did not provide any opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners neither were the petitioners confronted

in any manner by the S.I.T. while conducting the

inquiry and submission of the same, and secondly

that even from a perusal of the contents of the

report submitted by Special Investigating Team

there does not appear to be any material which can

be said to constitute any cognizable offence against

the petitioners. It has also been argued by learned

counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are merely

teachers who were appointed in a Madarsa and they

were duly appointed after following due process of

law and procedure, and accordingly, subjecting the

petitioners to criminal prosecution at this juncture, is

not appropriate.

So far as the first submission made by learned

counsel for the petitioners is concerned, we are of

the opinion that for lodging an F.I.R. under Section

154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in relation

to a cognizable offence, there is no of legal

requirement that action of lodging of F.I.R. should

necessarily precede any fact finding or preliminary

inquiry. In absence of any such legal requirement,

in our opinion, it was not necessary for the State

authorities to have associated the petitioners in the

preliminary inquiry conducted by Special

Investigating Team. As a matter of fact, the purpose

of conducting the preliminary inquiry is to gather

information and material so as to form an opinion

as to whether matter should be criminally preceded

or not. Thus, we are unable to agree with the first

48 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

submission made by learned counsel for the

petitioners.

As regard the second submission that even the

preliminary inquiry report submitted by the Special

Investigating Team does not disclose its commission

of any cognizable offence by the petitioners, we may

only observe that such challenge at this juncture is

premature, and if, this Court interferes in the

impugned order that may result in blocking of

lodging of an F.I.R. in relation to cognizable offence.

As to whether offence has been committed or not is

subject to investigation to be conducted once F.I.R. is

lodged and thereafter it is subject to trial, if a

chargesheet is filed on the basis of investigation. For

the aforesaid reasons, we are not inclined to interfere

in this writ petition, which is hereby dismissed.

However, notwithstanding the dismissal of the writ

petition, we permit the petitioners to raise their

grievances, if any, before the authority concerned

by way of making an application/representation

taking all the pleas which may be available to them

and enclosing therewith all the documents on which

they intend to rely. Once any such

application/representation is preferred, the

competent authority in the State Government shall

take into consideration the same and pass

appropriate order, which shall be communicated to

the petitioners also. ”

40.A perusal of the order of Division Bench shows that

challenge was made to the same decision dated 09.01.2023

49 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

which has also been impugned in both the writ petitions and,

infact, it is a communication made by the Special Secretary of

the U.P. Government to the concerned Director General of

Police to proceed in furtherance of Resolution dated 19.12.2022

and submit report before the Government. The Division Bench,

after taking into consideration identical arguments advanced

before the Court as regards ex-parte nature of investigation

conducted by the S.I.T. and its report dated 30.11.2022, clearly

opined that for lodging of F.I.R. under Section 154 Cr.P.C. in

relation to cognizable offence, there is no legal requirement that

lodging of F.I.R. should necessarily precede any fact finding or

preliminary inquiry and, therefore, in absence of any such legal

requirement, the Division Bench opined that it was not

necessary for the said Authorities to have associated the

petitioners in the preliminary inquiry conducted by the S.I.T.

and, as a matter of fact, the purpose of conducting preliminary

inquiry is to gather information and material so as to form an

opinion as to whether matter should be criminally proceeded or

not and, with this observation, the challenge made to the

findings recorded in the impugned decision/S.I.T. report to

propose criminal action, was turned down. The Division Bench

further observed that challenge made to the inquiry report on

the ground that no cognizable offence had been committed, was

premature and any interference in the order impugned would

result in blocking of lodging of an F.I.R. in relation to a

cognizable offence and as to whether an offence has or has not

been committed is always subject to investigation to be

conducted once F.I.R. is lodged and, thereafter, subject to trial

after a charge-sheet is filed on the basis of investigation. The

50 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

Division Bench, in so many specific words, rejected every

contention and dismissed the writ petition and, hence, this

Court cannot take a different view as far as the S.I.T. report

dated 30.11.2022 or the order dated 09.01.2023 confirming the

Resolution dated 19.12.2022 is concerned.

41.This Court further finds that despite dismissal of the writ

petition, the Division Bench permitted the concerned

petitioners to raise their grievances, if any, before the authority

concerned by way of making an application/representation

taking all the pleas which may be available to them and

enclosing therewith all the documents on which they intend to

rely. The Division Bench also observed that once any such

application/representation is preferred, the competent authority

in the State Government shall take into consideration the same

and pass appropriate order, which shall be communicated to the

petitioners also.

42.It is not disputed that the aforesaid decision of the

Division Bench was not placed before the Single Bench that

has passed interim orders dated 11.04.2023 and 19.05.2023,

respectively in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. Nos. 3380 of 2023

and 4891 of 2023 and, probably for this reason, the said interim

orders appear to have been passed in ignorance of the Division

Bench judgment/order dated 09.02.2023. Similar is the

position with respect to the interim orders dated 19.04.2023 and

28.03.2023 passed in these two writ petitions which were ex-

parte and apparently in ignorance of the Division Bench

judgment/order, as the order of the Division Bench was placed

51 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

alongwith counter affidavit filed by the State. I am also of the

view that whereas the S.I.T. report refers to action taken

against 313 Madarsas, merely on the challenge made by one

Madarsa in Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and 13 Madarsas in

Writ C No.5992 of 2023, the entire efforts made by the

S.I.T. culminated into preparation of detailed report dated

30.11.2022 should not be nullified or even suspended

barring further proceedings in toto or even in respect of the

petitioners.

43. I am of the firm view that the interim orders passed in the

aforesaid applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or even the

interim orders passed in these writ petitions would not have a

binding force for any purpose as the same were admittedly

passed without taking into consideration the Division Bench

order dated 09.02.2023. These interim orders, in the opinion of

the Court, suffer from the defect of “per incuriam ” . "Incuria "

literally means "carelessness". In practice, per incuriam is

taken to mean per ignoratium. English Courts have developed

this principle in relaxation of the rule of stare decisis. The

"quotable in law", as held in Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co.

Ltd. (1944) 2 All E.R. 293, is avoided and ignored if it is

rendered, "in ignoratium of a statute or other binding

authority". Same has been accepted, approved and adopted by

the Apex Court while interpreting Article 141 of the

Constitution of India, 1950 which embodies the doctrine of

precedents as a matter of law. The above position was

highlighted in State of U.P. and another v. Synthetics and

Chemicals Ltd. And another (1991) 4 SCC 139). To

52 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

perpetuate an error is no heroism. To rectify it is the

compulsion of the judicial conscience. The aforesaid

proposition of law has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in

the case of Nirmal Jeet Kaur v. State of Madhya Pradesh and

Another, JT 2004 (7) SC 161.

44. Halsburry's Laws of England (Fourth Edition) Vol.26:

Judgment and Orders Judicial Decisions as Authorities (pages

297-298, Para 578) observed about per incuriam stating that a

decision is given per incuriam when the court has acted in

ignorance of a previous decision of its own or of a court of

coordinate jurisdiction while covered the case before it, in

which case it must decide which case to follow or when it has

acted in ignorance of a House of Lords decision, in which case

it must follow that decision; or when the decision is given in

ignorance of the terms of a statute or rule having statutory

force. Even if a decision of the court of appeal has

misinterpreted a previous decision of the House of lords, the

court of appeal must follow its previous decision and leave the

House of Lords to rectify the mistake.

45. The Supreme Court, in (2000) 4 S.C.C. 262, Govt. of

Andhra Pradesh and Anr. v. B. Satyanarayana Rao (Dead) by

Lrs. , has held that rule of Per incuriam can be applied where a

Court omits to consider a binding precedent of the same court

or the superior court rendered on the same issue or where a

court omits to consider any statute while deciding that issue. A

decision by two judges, has a binding effect on another Co-

53 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

ordinate Bench of two judges, unless it is demonstrated that the

said decision by any subsequent change in law or decision,

ceases to lay down a correct law. The same proposition of law

has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in the case of State of

Bihar v. Kalika Kuer @ Kalika Singh and others reported in

JT 2003 (4) SC 489. The concept of "per incuriam" has been

considered by the Apex Court time and again explaining that

the expression means through inadvertence or a point of law is

not consciously determined. If an issue is neither raised, nor

argued, a decision by the Court after pondering over the issue in

depth would not be precedent binding on the Courts. (Vide

Mamleshwar Prasad & Anr. Vs. Kanahaiya Lal (Dead), (1975)

2 SCC 232; Rajpur Ruda Meha & Ors. Vs. State of Gujrat, AIR

1980 SC 1707; A.R. Antule Vs. R.S. Nayak, AIR 1988 SC 1531;

Municipal Corporation of Delhi Vs. Gurnam Kaur, AIR 1989

SC 38; Punjab Land Development and Reclamation

Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour

Court, Chandigarh & Ors., (1990) 3 SCC 682; State of West

Bengal Vs. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd., (1991) 1 SCC 139;

Maharashtra State Cooperative Cotton Growers Marketing

Federation Ltd & Anr. Vs. Employees' Union & Anr., 1994

Supp (3) SCC 385; Pawan Alloys & Casting Pvt Ltd, Meerut

Vs. U.P. State Electricity Board & Ors., (1997) 7 SCC 251;

Ram Gopal Baheti Vs. Girdharilal Soni & Ors., (1999) 3 SCC

112; Sarnam Singh Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation & Ors.,

(1999) 5 SCC 638; Govt. of Andhra Pradesh Vs. B.

Satyanarayana Rao, AIR 2000 SC 1729; Arnit Das Vs. State of

Bihar (2000) 5 SCC 488; M/s. Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. Vs.

Jindal Exports Ltd., AIR 2001 SC 2293; A-One Granites Vs.

54 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

State of U.P. & Ors., (2001) 3 SCC 537; Suganthi Suresh

Kumar Vs. Jagdeeshan, AIR 2002 SC 681; Director of

Settlements A.P. & Ors. Vs. M.R. Apparao & Anr., (2002) 4

SCC 638; S. Shanmugavel Nadar Vs. State of T.N & Anr..,

(2002) 8 SCC 361; State of Bihar Vs. Kalika Kuer Kalika Singh

& Ors., AIR 2003 SC 2443; and Manda Jaganath Vs. K.S.

Rathnam & Ors., (2004) 7 SCC 492).

46.Usually, the concept of “per incuriam” is discussed and

applied in terms of final judgments, however, in the present

case, while referring to the order dated 09.02.2023 passed in

Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1131 of 2023, in connection

with the interim orders passed in the aforesaid applications

under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as well as in these two writ petitions,

the Court feels it apt to utilize the philosophy underlying the

concept of “per incuriam” and observes that the same principle

would apply while passing the interim orders also as it applies

in the case of finality attached to any decision. That is to say

that if interim orders in the aforesaid applications under Section

482 Cr.P.C. as well as these two writ petitions have been passed

in ignorance of the decision of Division Bench of this Court

dated 09.02.2023 pased in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition

No.1131 of 2023, all the four interim orders would be hit by the

principle of “per incuriam”.

47.There is another aspect of this matter as reflected during

the course of arguments. It was argued on behalf of the

petitioners that judgment/order dated 09.02.2023 was passed in

a Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition arising out of those

circumstances, under which, the concerned petitioners were

55 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

facing criminal action; however, the issues involved in the

present cases are much wider in nature and, therefore, the order

passed by a Bench exercising criminal jurisdiction, would not

be of much significance in the present cases.

48.I am unable to accept the contention so advanced. The

reason is that our Constitution of India is “neither a book of

civil nature nor of criminal”. When it comes to exercise of

powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the same

are certainly for enforcement of Fundamental Rights conferred

by Part III of the Constitution by means of any or more of the

five prerogative writs, i.e. Habeas Corpus, Mandamus,

Prohibition, Quo Warranto and Certiorari. While practically

applying Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Chapter XXII

Rule 1 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 (hereinafter

referred to as ‘the Rules, 1952’) may be referred to. The said

Chapter does not differentiate between writs of different nature

except cognizability before Single/Division Bench. Therefore,

even the Rules of the Court uniformally apply for writs of every

nature. The said Chapter is contained under Part IV of the

Rules, 1952 titled as “Enforcement of Fundamental Rights”.

Insofar as the Civil and Criminal jurisdictions are concerned,

Civil jurisdiction is contatined in Part II of the Rules, 1952

whereas criminal jurisdication finds place under Part III of the

Rules, 1952 and both parts elaborately describe nature of

various proceedings, respectively of civil and criminal

jurisdiction.

49.From the aforesaid discussion of Article 226 of the

Contitution of India read with Parts II, III and IV of the Rules,

56 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

1952, it is clear that any judgment of Writ Court, either in a

Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition or Criminal Miscellaneous

Writ Petition would have impact either way, depending upon

the issues raised and decided by the concerned Writ Court. In

the aforesaid Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.1131 of 2023, the

issue before the Division Bench was the same which is

involved in these two writ petitions as well as in the aforesaid

applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C., i.e. as to whether for

alleged want of opportunity to participate during investigation

process culminating into report dated 30.11.2022 submitted by

the Special Investigation Team and consequential Resolution of

the State Government dated 19.12.2022 and/or its approval by

impugned communication dated 09.01.2023, the petitioners are

entitled to any relief or not. Hence, the judgment passed by the

Division Bench in Criminal Miscellaneous Writ Petition cannot

be treated as “alien to the present proceedings” either on facts

or on law or on the categorization etc. etc.

50. Now while referring to two more documents on record, I

find that even the Recognition Letter dated 27.07.2011,

‘Annexure No.5’ to Writ C No. 11005/ 2023, clearly reflects

that recognition is subject to sub-clauses (v), (vi) (vii) and (viii)

of Section 10 of the Act, 2004. It means that, in case, violation

of the aforesaid provisions of law is found to have taken place,

withdrawal of recognition can be a necessary consequence.

Insofar as the letter dated 25.08.2017 issued by the District

Magistrate, Azamgarh to various Authorities is concerned, I

find that the concerned Committee was headed by the Sub

Divisional Officers of the concerned Tehsils and its members

57 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

being District Backward Class Welfare Officers, District

Minority Welfare Officers and District Social Welfare Officers

concerned and even the District Magistrate observed that

considering the large number of Madarsas and the fact that

they did not fulfill standards, extensive inquiry is expected.

Hence, if SIT has conducted the extensive investigation, its

report cannot be said to be unlawful, merely, because in 2016-

2017, some inquiry at Tehsil level was conducted.

51. While concluding this judgment, another important

feature associated with the power of the State Government

conferred by Section 13 (4) of the Act, 2004 should not be left

undiscussed as the said power speaks that whenever, in the

opinion of the State Government, it is necessary or expedient to

take immediate action, it may without making any reference to

the Board under the foregoing provisions, pass such order or

take such other action consistent with this Act as it deems

necessary and, in particular, may by such order, modify or

rescind or make any regulation in respect of any matter and

shall forthwith inform the Board accordingly. Hence, if the

State Government constituted a Special Investigation Team to

carry out inspection and it carried investigation, either through

spot inspection or through Portal information uploaded by the

Board or by both modes, action or steps taken by it cannot be

said to be unjustified in totality of facts and circumstances of

the case, as elaborately discussed.

52.In view of the above discussion, following is the end

result of these writ-proceedings:-

58 Writ C No.11005 of 2023 and Writ C No.5992 of 2023.

(i) prayers to quash or set aside either the S.I.T. report

dated 30.11.2022 or the Resolution of the State

Government dated 19.12.2022 or the communication of

the Special Secretary dated 09.01.2023 are hereby

refused and declined and both the writ petitions are

dismissed with the same liberty to the petitioners, as

granted by the Division Bench of this Court in order dated

09.02.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition

No.1131 of 2023.

(ii) Interim order dated 19.04.2023 passed in Writ C

No.11005 of 2023 and dated 28.03.2023 in Writ C No.5992 of

2023 are hereby vacated.

Order Date:-6.9.2023

Jyotsana

(Kshitij Shailendra, J.)