1998 (11) TMI 693 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the nomination of Ramachandra Mohapatra as President of the Governing Body.
2. Definition and qualifications of an "eminent educationist."
3. Allegations against Ramachandra Mohapatra and their impact on his nomination.
4. Legal provisions and procedural aspects of nomination under the Orissa Education Rules.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Challenge to the Nomination of Ramachandra Mohapatra:
The nomination of Ramachandra Mohapatra as President of the Governing Body of Ramamani Mahavidyalaya, Kantabad, was challenged under Rule 27 of the Orissa Education Rules, 1991. The main contention was that Ramachandra Mohapatra did not qualify as an "eminent educationist," which is a sine qua non for such nomination.

2. Definition and Qualifications of an "Eminent Educationist":
The term "eminent educationist" has not been explicitly defined in the Rules. The court referred to various dictionaries and previous judgments to interpret the term. An educationist is generally understood to be someone skilled in the methods of education and teaching, or one who promotes education. The court noted that the expression "eminent educationist" was conceptually different from "person interested in the field of education," which was the requirement in the old Rules. The importance of education and the role of an educationist were elaborated through references to judicial decisions and literary works, emphasizing the need for qualified and respectable individuals in educational governance.

3. Allegations Against Ramachandra Mohapatra:
The petitioners alleged that Ramachandra Mohapatra had only studied up to Class VII and had no significant contributions to the field of education. Moreover, he was involved in serious criminal cases, including an alleged attempt to commit rape. Despite being served notice, Ramachandra Mohapatra did not contest these allegations, leaving them unrefuted. The court acknowledged that false cases might be foisted due to political or personal rivalries but emphasized that the nomination should steer clear of controversies and ensure the academic atmosphere of the institution.

4. Legal Provisions and Procedural Aspects of Nomination:
The court examined Rule 27 of the Orissa Education Rules, which outlines the composition and nomination process for the Governing Body of aided higher secondary schools. The rule allows the government to nominate an eminent educationist as President. Rule 29(c) disqualifies a person from being a member of the Governing Body if convicted of an offense involving moral turpitude. Since the criminal proceedings against Ramachandra Mohapatra were still sub judice, his removal was not mandated. However, the court found that the nomination process did not adequately consider the qualifications and suitability of the nominee, as there was no substantial discussion or material on record to support the conclusion that Ramachandra Mohapatra was an eminent educationist.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the order dated 21-11-1997 nominating Ramachandra Mohapatra as President of the Governing Body, citing the lack of consideration of relevant aspects and the potential negative impact on the institution's educational atmosphere. The judgment underscored the importance of nominating qualified and respectable individuals to educational governance positions to maintain the integrity and academic environment of educational institutions.