{"id":230098,"date":"2004-08-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-08-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004"},"modified":"2015-05-04T08:31:55","modified_gmt":"2015-05-04T03:01:55","slug":"committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","title":{"rendered":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 2005 (2) AWC 2249<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A Tandon<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: A Tandon<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>Arun Tandon, J.<\/p>\n<p>1. Heard Sri H.K. Singh on behalf of the petitioner, learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Sri P.N. Saxena, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Umesh Vats on behalf of respondent No. 3. Nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent No. 4 despite notice having been issued by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.     Smt. Buchai Devi widow of late   Chandra   Dev  Singh,   claiming herself  to   be   the   Manager   of  the Committee of Management Mahanth Vishwanath Yati Madhyamik Vidyalaya Chogra, Ballia, has filed this petition against the order of the Prescribed Authority dated   17th  March,  2004, whereby the Prescribed Authority has held that the petitioner is not even a member of the general body which constitutes  the electoral college for electing   the   office   bearers   of  the society and further it has been held that   the   elections   set   up   by   the. respondent    No.     3,    which    are unopposed and  supported by other members of the general body, are legal and valid.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.    On behalf of the petitioner it is contended that the finding recorded by  the  Prescribed Authority to  the effect   that   the  Treasurer   alone   is competent to accept membership fee is  illegal and  runs  contrary to  the registered  bye-laws   of the   society, which empowers the Manager also to accept   the   membership   fee.   It   is further stated that if the fee deposited by   the   petitioner   and   other   four persons have not been transmitted by the Manager to the bank account or to the account maintained in the post office, the petitioner cannot be said to have committed any fault nor it can be a basis for holding that the petitioner is not valid member of the general body. It is further contended that the Prescribed     Authority     has     not considered the issue as to whether elections set up by the respondent No. 3 were held in accordance with the registered bye-laws\/approved scheme of      administration       or      not. Consequently, the order passed by the Prescribed    Authority    cannot    be sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.   On behalf of the respondent it is contended that since the petitioner has been held not to be valid member of the general body by the Prescribed Authority, the only remedy available to petitioner, in such circumstances, is by way of civil suit and this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot interfere with the order passed by the Prescribed Authority. In that regard reliance has been placed upon the Division Bench judgment of this Court in 1995 (2) UPLBEC 1242.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.    So far as the issue with regard to maintainability of the present writ petition is concerned, it is true that the Division Bench of this Court has held that if an order has been passed by   the   Prescribed   Authority   after recording reasons and applying his mind   to   the   fact  and   all   relevant material  on  record  with  regard   to present member of the general body, the aggrieved person can only seek remedy before the civil court of law. However, the said judgment does not lay down as proposition of law that even in the cases where the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority are perverse and based on misreading of the provisions of the registered bye-laws,    no    writ    petition    can    be maintained.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.    In the opinion of the Court, Prescribed   Authority   is   statutory authority and is under legal obligation to decide all issues after taking into account whether the dispute between the parties is genuine or not. If any order  is  passed  by  the  Prescribed Authority,   which   is   perverse   and based on misreading of the provisions of registered bye-laws, this Court can always interfere with such a finding. Accordingly, it is held that in case the order   passed   by   the   Prescribed Authority is perverse, the present writ petition   as   filed   by   the   petitioner cannot be said to be not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.    For the purposes of deciding the issue as to whether Prescribed Authority has taken into consideration all the materials on record, provisions of the registered by-laws for recording the finding that petitioner is a valid member of the general body or not, it would be necessary to refer to  the powers   of the  Manager which  has been conferred upon him by the registered by-laws, enclosed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition, wherein clause 16 provides as follows :\n<\/p>\n<p>^^16- inkf\/kdkfj;ksa ds dk;Z ,oa vf\/kdkj %<\/p>\n<p>\u00bcd\u00bd izcU\/kd ,d lkS :i;s rd ds O;; dh Loh\u00d1fr<br \/>\ndj ldsxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bc[k\u00bd izcU\/kd prqFkZ oxZ ds deZpkfj;ksa dh<br \/>\nvLFkk;h fu;qf\u00e4 dj ldsxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bcx\u00bd iz\/kkukpk;Z ds vkdfLed vodk&#8217;k dh Loh\u00d1fr<br \/>\ndjsxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bc?k\u00bd vko&#8217;;d i=kpkj dk lapkyu djsxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bcM+\u00bd leLr vk;&amp;O;; ds i= dh iaftdk j[ksxk<br \/>\nA<\/p>\n<p>\u00bcp\u00bd izcU\/k lfefr dh vksj ls leLr vk;&amp;O;;\n<\/p>\n<p>ds fofu;ksx ij gLrk{kj djsxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bcN\u00bd laLFkk ds fy;s nku] vuqnku voa &#8216;kqYd vkfn<br \/>\ndks izkIr djsxk vkSj mudk fu;fer ys[kk j[ksxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bct\u00bd okf&#8221;kZd ctV rS;kj djsxk vkSj izcU\/k<br \/>\nlfefr }kjk mls ikfjr djk;sxk A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bc&gt;\u00bd fuEufyf[r iaftdkvksa dk vuqj{k.k djsxk<br \/>\nA**<\/p>\n<p>8.   From the aforesaid provisions, it is apparently clear that the power to accept   membership   fee   has   been conferred upon the Manager as well as Treasurer    of   the    society.    Since according     to     petitioner,      the membership fee deposited by her was accepted   by   the   Manager   of   the institution   and   in   that   regard   a photostat copy of the receipt was also produced    before    the    Prescribed Authority, the finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority to the effect that the Treasurer alone was competent to accept the membership fee, is legally not   sustainable   and   is   based   on misreading of the aforesaid clause 16 of the aforesaid registered bye-laws as it confers the power upon the Manager to accept membership fee.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.   Similarly,      the      findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority to the effect that the Treasurer has neither accepted membership fee of the petitioner and five other persons nor has transmitted the same to any bank account or post office account of the society, is wholly misconceived and totally irrelevant for deciding the issue as to whether petitioner is valid member or not inasmuch as if the Manager has failed to transfer the membership fee, received from the petitioner and other persons to any bank\/post office account of the society, no fault can be attributed to petitioner nor her membership be jeopardized.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.   Similarly,    the   last   finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority in respect of the membership of the petitioner   to   the   effect   that   the petitioner has deposited a sum of Rs. 2,000  which   does  not   answer  the prescribed   fee   in   respect   of  four categories of member as mentioned in the    bye-laws,    is    also    perverse inasmuch   as   under  the  registered bye-laws four category of members are mentioned in clause 6, which reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n<p> ^^\u00bcd\u00bd lk\/kkj.k lHkk&amp;&amp;<br \/>\ntks X;kjg :i;s =Sekfld lnL;rk &#8216;kqYd nsaxs os lk\/kkj.k lnL; gksaxs A<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0\u00a0  \u00bc[k\u00bd fof&#8217;k&#8221;V lnL;&amp;&amp;<br \/>\ntks ,d lkS ,d :i;k =Sekfld lnL;rk &#8216;kqYd nsaxs ,oa =Sekfld X;kjg :i;s nsdj<br \/>\nuohuhdj.k djks;saxs A<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0\u00a0  \u00bcx\u00bd vkthou lnL;&amp;&amp; tks ,deq&#8217;r<br \/>\nflQZ ,d ckj ,d gtkj ,d :i;s nsaxs rFkk thouksi;ZUr lnL; cus jgsaxs A<\/p>\n<p>\u00bc?k\u00bd laj{kd&amp;&amp; lnL; tks ,deq&#8217;r flQZ ,d<br \/>\nckj ikap gtkj :i;k nsaxs A mudh e`R;q ds mijkUr mudk iq=&amp;iq=h tks dksbZ Hkh<br \/>\ngks laj{kd lnL; gksxk A** <\/p>\n<p>11.   From the aforesaid, clause 6 (c),   it   is   apparent   that   for   being enrolled as life member, the minimum fee  prescribed  is  Rs.   1,000.   If any person tenders more than Rs.  1,000 as  fee,   it  cannot be  said  that  the money     so     deposited     towards membership fee is not in accordance with the bye-laws of the society. The finding  recorded  by  the  Prescribed Authority   to   the   effect   that   the Treasurer    is    not    aware    of   the membership   of   the   petitioner   is neither here nor there inasmuch as membership is to be decided on the basis of records produced and not on the basis of personal knowledge of the Treasurer.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.   In such circumstances, none of the reasons, assigned for holding that the petitioner was not valid life member of the general body, can be legally  sustained   as   the   same  are based    on    non-consideration    of material provisions of registered bye-laws and  as such is perverse. The said finding is accordingly set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.   In     view    of     the     such circumstances,     the     dispute    is remanded to the Prescribed Authority for deciding the question about the legality   or   otherwise   of   the   life membership   of  the   petitioner,   as claimed by her, afresh and for said purpose the Prescribed Authority is directed   to   summon   the   original record of the meeting of the Committee of Management, which are alleged to have   taken   place   subsequent   to enrolment of petitioner and to see in any of such meeting the petitioner has participated   or   not   as   also   other relevant records which the petitioner may    produce    to    establish    her membership.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.   Further,   as   the   Prescribed Authority has  refused  to  take  into consideration  the  objections  of the petitioner with regards to the elections set up by the respondent No. 3 on the ground that the petitioner is not a valid member of the general body and since  this  Court  is  remanding  the matter to the Prescribed Authority to decide     the     said     dispute     of membership afresh, the order of the Prescribed Authority in  its  entirety cannot be sustained  and is hereby quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.   The Prescribed Authority shall re-examine the matter after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned and pass appropriate order within one month from today. If the Prescribed   Authority   comes   to   a conclusion that the petitioner is not a valid member of the general body, any question raised by the petitioner as to the   legality   or   otherwise   of   the elections   of  respondent   shall   not survive.\n<\/p>\n<pre>16.   Writ    petition    is    allowed subject   to   the   observations   made above.\n \n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004 Equivalent citations: 2005 (2) AWC 2249 Author: A Tandon Bench: A Tandon JUDGMENT Arun Tandon, J. 1. Heard Sri H.K. Singh on behalf of the petitioner, learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230098","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1677,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\",\"name\":\"Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004","datePublished":"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004"},"wordCount":1677,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004","name":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth ... vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And ... on 11 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-04T03:01:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/committee-of-management-mahanth-vs-prescribed-authority-a-d-m-and-on-11-august-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Committee Of Management, Mahanth &#8230; vs Prescribed Authority, A.D.M. And &#8230; on 11 August, 2004"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230098","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=230098"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230098\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230098"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230098"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230098"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}