http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 4  

PETITIONER: SWETAMBAR STHANAKWASI JAINSAMITI & ANR.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: THE ALLEGED COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENTSRI R.J.I. COLLEGES AGRA

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       14/02/1996

BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) BENCH: KULDIP SINGH (J) AHMAD SAGHIR S. (J)

CITATION:  1996 AIR 1209            1996 SCC  (3)  11  JT 1996 (3)    21        1996 SCALE  (2)195

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                       J U D G M E N T Kuldip Singh, J.      Special leave granted.      Swetambar  Sthanlakwasi   Jain  Samiti  (the  society), Petitioner  No.1   in  the   appeal  herein,  is  a  society registered under the Societies Registration Act. The society claims that  it has established and is administering various educational institutions  including Sri Ratnamuni Jain Inter College (The  college) Agra.  This appeal  is sequel  to the litigation between  two rival  management  committees,  both claiming right to manage the college.      It is  not necessary  for us  to go into the details of the litigation  going on  between the  parties for  the last more than  ten years.  Suffice it  to say that respondents 1 and 2,  in the  appeal herein,  got a rival society, namely, RMJ Educational  Society (the  RMJ Society) registered under the Societies  Registration Act  on September  10, 1991. The society and  the RMJ  Society have  submitted their separate schemes for  the administration of the college to the Deputy Director of Education and the District Inspector of Schools, Agra. The  appellants elected  their managing  committee  on July 1,  1991 whereas respondents 1 and 2 elected a separate management committee  on June  21, 1991. Both the committees have been  approaching the  Deputy Director of Education and District Inspector  of Schools for recognition and different orders  at   different  times  have  been  passed  by  these authorities.      The Deputy  Registrar Societies,  respondent 6  in  the appeal herein,  by the  order dated March l9, 1994 cancelled the registration of RMJ Society. As a consequence the Deputy Director of  Education by  the order  dated March  23,  1934 directed the District Inspector of Schools to take immediate action in the matter and grant recognition to the scheme of administration submitted  by the  appellants. This  was done and appellant  No.2, Kamal  Kumar  Jain  was  recognised  as

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 4  

manager of  the college  and was  permitted  to  manage  and operate the  bank accounts.  The success  of the  appellants was, however,  short-lived. The Deputy Director of Education and the  District Inspector of Schools withdraw their orders and stopped  the appellants  from managing  the college  and operating the  bank accounts.  The appellants challenged the orders of  the Deputy  Director of  Education  and  District Inspector of Schools by way of a civil suit no.230/94 in the Court of Civil Judge Agra. The suit was transferred to the IIIrd Additional  Civil Judge,  Agra who  by the order dated April 4,  1994 granted  interim injunction  as prayed for by the appellants.  Moti Lal  Jain, respondent  2 in the appeal herein, filed  an application  on April  5, 1994  before the Additional Civil Judge for being impleaded as a party in the suit. The application was dismissed by the learned Judge.      Respondents 1  & 2 challenged, the order of the learned Additional Civil Judge by which he granted interim relief to the appellants,  the order  rejecting  the  application  for impleadment and  also for quashing of the plaint, before the High Court  by way  of a  writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution  or lndia.  The High Court allowed the writ petition in the following terms :      [Thus,  the   petition  deserved  to  be      allowed partly.  The prayer for quashing      the plaint  and proceedings  in original      suit No.230  of  94  supra  is  rejected      mainly on  the ground           that the      petitioners have  an alternative  remedy      under Order 7, Rules 10 and 11 C.P.C.      The prayer  for quashing the order dated      4.4.94 (Annexure  20 to the petition) is      allowed and  so is  the  case  with  the      order dated  5.4.94 (Annexure  23 to the      petition) rejecting  the application for      impleadment.  Both   these  orders   are      quashed  totally.  The  application  for      impleadment as defendant by Sri Moti Lal      Jain is  allowed. The proceedings before      the learned  IIlrd  Addl.  Civil  Judge,      Agra in Original          suit No.230 of      94,  Shri   Swetambar  Sthanakwasi  Jain      Samiti  Vs.   Regional  by.Director   of      Education and  others stands transferred      with immediate  effect to  the court  of      the  District   Judge,  Agra  who  shall      transfer  it   to  any  other  court  of      competent jurisdiction,  other than  Sri      Chandra Bhan,  IIIrd Addl.  Civil Judge,      Agra.      It is made clear that after Sri Moti Lal      Jain’s  impleadment   as  defendant,  he      shall be  given an  opportunity to  file      objections    against     the    interim      injunctions   applications and  also the      written statement  against  the  plaint.      The   application for interim injunction      would be  considered afresh  again after      hearing the parties by the learned Civil      Judge, to whom the case is transferred.      Till   the   final   disposal   of   the      injunction  application,  Sri  Moti  Lal      Jain shall  continue to  function as the      Manager of  the Committee  to Management      of Sri  Ratan Muni  Jain Inter  College,      Loha Mandi,  Agra and  nobody  shall  be

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 4  

    allowed to  disturb his  functioning  as      such. After any order passed under Order      39, Rules  1 and 2 C.P.C. affected party      will  have   statutory  remedy  to  file      appeal/revision as  provided  under  the      Code of Civil Procedure." This appeal  by the society and Kamal Kumar Jain, Manager of the College,  is against  the above  quoted judgment  of the High Court.      The High  Court in  the impugned  judgment noticed  the prayers of  the writ  petitioners before  the said  court as under :      "In this writ petition a prayer has been      made for  an order  or direction  in the      nature of certiorari quashing the plaint      and all proceedings in original suit No.      230 of  94, Sri  Sweatambar  Sthanakwasi      Jain Samiti  and others vs. Regional Dy.      Director of Education Agra Region, Agra.      Further a  writ, order  or direction has      been  prayed  for  quashing  the  orders      dated 4.4.94  and 5.4.94  passed by  the      lIIrd Addl. Civil Judge, Agra respondent      No.l (Annexures  20 and  23 to  the writ      petition). There is an additional prayer      to restrain  respondent No.1  i.e. Addl.      Civil  Judge,   Agra  from   taking  any      further  proceedings  in  original  suit      No.230 of 94         aforesaid."      It is not disputed that the remedy of appeal before the District Judge  was available to the respondents against the order of  the Additional  Civil judge  by which  the learned Judge granted  interim injunction  against the  respondents. The order  dated April 5, 1994 rejecting the applications of respondent No.2  for impleadment could also be challenged by way of revision. The High Court also noticed this aspect in the following words :      "Of course,  he could  have availed  the      jurisdiction of  the District Judge, who      has an  authority to hear appeal as well      as revision.  But some  how or the other      he has  been advised  to  approach  this      Court"      We are  of the  view that  the High Court not only fell into patent  error but  also exceeded its jurisdiction under Article  226  of  the  Constitution  of  India.  Though  the jurisdiction or  the High  Court under  Article 226  of  the Constitution is  not confined  to  issuing  the  prerogative writs, there  is a  consensus of opinion that the High Court will  not  permit  this  extraordinary  jurisdiction  to  be converted into  a civil court under the ordinary law. When a suit is  pending between  the two  parties the  interim  and miscellaneous orders  passed by  the trial  court -  against which the remedy of appeal or revision is available - cannot be challenged by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution  of India.  Where the  civil court  has the jurisdiction to  try a  suit, the  High Court cannot convert itself into  an appellate  or revisional court and interfere with the  interim/miscellaneous orders  of the  civil court. The writ jurisdiction is meant for doing justice between the parties where it cannot be done in any other forum.      We, therefore,  allow the  appeal with  costs  and  set aside the  impugned judgment  of the  High Court.  The  writ petition filed  by respondents 1 and 2 before the High Court shall stand  dismissed. We quantify the costs as Rs.20,000/-

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 4  

to be paid by respondent No. 2.