Apr - High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1 All V.V.P. Welfare Association V. State of U.P. and others 465
2 (aa). " "Centre" means an
institution or a place fixed by the Board for
the purposes of holding its examinations
and includes the entire premises attached
thereto;
6. This definition was introduced be
way of an amendment in the year 1959
itself as it was necessary to empower the
Board to hold examinations at a particular
centre by fixing the same and appointing a
superintendent for conducting the said
examinations. The power to regulate is,
therefore, implicit with regard to the
location of centres.
7. This Court in the case of
Jamiluddin, Manager, Managing
Committee, Saghir Fatima Mohammadia
Girls Inter College Agra Vs. Secretary
Board of High School and Intermediate
Allahabad and others reported in 2003 (1)
ESC 347 has held as follows:
"While parting with the case, I would
like to note that no Manager has any right
to challenge the selection of centres. The
Court takes judicial notice of the fact that
self centres are places of well
manipulation and designed centres for
permitting candidates to use unfair means
by charging money and that is sole interest
of the Managers of such Institutions. U.P.
Board and District Level Committees
should be given free hand for selecting
centres and this Court should not,
particularly in exercise of its jurisdiction
under Article 226, Constitution of India,
interfere with the same as it is an
administrative decision. It goes without
saying that this Court has always
jurisdiction to interfere with the
Administrative orders in the rarest of rare
cases, provided petitioner furnishes
sufficient material to show that such
decision has been taken arbitrarily or with
some ulterior motives."
8. The petitioner-association,
therefore, cannot contend on behalf of the
Managers of the institutions that they have
an absolute right to maintain this writ
petition for the said cause.
9. The impugned provisions are all
regulatory in nature, inasmuch as, they
advance the cause of holding examinations
and merely because the said provisions
have either been misused or not put to use
or not having been strictly complied with,
the same cannot be declared to be ultra
vires the provisions of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India. The independent
cases relating to such allotments can be
challenged by aggrieved persons and not
by the association. The Government
Orders, which have been issued, are in
consonance with the provisions of 1921
Act and they do not travel beyond the
scope of the powers conferred on the
Board under the aforesaid Act. The
Government Orders do not offend any
public policy. The institutions have no
right to claim that they should function as
centres. The issue relating to
discrimination of not making some of the
institutions as centres cannot lead to the
conclusion that the action of the Board is
arbitrary.
10. Apart from this, the petition has
been filed at the verge of the moment when
the examinations are about to commence.
Any alteration as prayed for by the
petitioners would even otherwise
jeopardise the entire examinations. The
operation of self centres and the menace of
centres claiming such rights were also
noticed by the Division Bench in the case
of Krishna Kumar Upadhyay Vs. State of