IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 16565 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 A.ABDUL RASHEED KUTTY
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. ABDUL KHADER, "KUTTIYIL", EDAVANASSERI,
MYNAGAPPALLY P.O., KOLLAM-690 519
2 C.Y.NIZAM
AGED 56 YEARS
"KUTTIYIL", VENGA P.O., SASTHAMCOTTAH,
KOLLAM-690 521
BY ADVS.
K.S.BHARATHAN
ALPHIN ANTONY
AADITHYAN S.MANNALI
VISAKH ANTONY
ABEL ANTONY
CHRISTINE MATHEW
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY
VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001
2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001
3 THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT, ANNEX
II,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001
4 THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 014
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:2:
5 THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 014
6 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
KOLLAM,PIN-691 009
7 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KOLLAM CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM,PIN-691 013
8 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE (SPECIAL INVESTIGATION UNIT),
POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 012
9 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
(VIGILANCE), NEAR CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM
10 SMT.UMAIBA BEEVI
BABU NIVAS, NO.71 POORAM NAGAR, ASRAMAM,
KOLLAM,PIN-691 002
11 MISRIYAKUNJU,
EZHICHINETUVEEDU, KADATHURMURI, THAZHAVA P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT,PIN-690 539
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH
K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
P.MARTIN JOSE
P.PRIJITH
THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
MANJUNATH MENON
R.GITHESH
SACHIN JACOB AMBAT
ANNA LINDA V.J
HANI P.NAIR
HARIKRISHNAN S.
C.R.SYAMKUMAR
ASWIN KUMAR M J
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:3:
HELEN P.A.
SHAHIR SHOWKATH ALI
P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
K.SUDHINKUMAR
S.K.ADHITHYAN
SABU PULLAN
GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT ANIMA M GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.06.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).20234/2021, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:4:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 20234 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 A. ABDUL RASHEED KUTTY
AGED 60 YEARS
S/O. ABDUL KHADER, "KUTTIYIL" EDAVANASSERI,
MYNAGAPPALLY P.O, KOLLAM - 690519.
2 C.Y. NIZAM, AGED 56 YEARS,
"KUTTIYIL" VENGA P.O, SASTHAMCOTTAH, KOLLAM -
690521.
BY ADVS.
K.S.BHARATHAN
ALPHIN ANTONY
AADITHYAN S.MANNALI
VISAKH ANTONY
ABEL ANTONY
CHRISTINE MATHEW
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
HOME & VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001,
2 THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
GENERAL EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001,
3 THE UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GENERAL EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT, ANNEX II,
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:5:
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001.
4 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014,
5 THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF GENERAL
EDUCATION(GENERAL)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014,
6 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
KOLLAM, THEVALLY, PIN - 691009.
7 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
KOLLAM CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013,.
8 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE & ANTI- CORRUPTION BUREAU (SPECIAL
INVESTIGATION UNIT), POOJAPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695012.
9 THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
VIGILANCE & ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,
NEAR CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691013.
10 UMAIBA BEEVI
BABU NIVAS, NO.71 POORAM NAGAR, ASRAMOM, KOLLAM,
PIN - 691002.
11 MISRIYAKUNJU
EZHICHINETUVEEDU, KADATHURMURI, THAZHAVA P.O,
KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690539.
12 THE DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE & ANTI- CORRUPTION
BUREAU,
VIKAS BHAVAN P.O, PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695033.
BY ADVS.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:6:
ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
C.R.SYAMKUMAR
ASWIN KUMAR M J
HELAN PACHAN
ARUN ROY
SHAHIR SHOWKATH ALI
P.MARTIN JOSE
SMT.ANIMA M, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 29.06.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).16565/2021, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:7:
JUDGMENT
These two writ petitions have been filed by the very same petitioners. While the prayer sought for in W.P.(C) No. 16565/2021 is for a direction to the 1st respondent to expedite the investigation sought for in Exts.P6 and P7 representations and also for a further direction to the 3rd respondent not to pass final orders in Ext.P3 revision petition filed by the petitioners; the prayer in W.P.(C) No. 20234/2021 is to quash Ext.P10 order issued by the Director General of Education ("DGE") informing the petitioners that no action can be taken by the Department on the various allegations leveled by the petitioners. They have also sought a direction to the DGE to conduct an inquiry afresh in accordance with Ext.P5 request made by the 3rd respondent to the 4th respondent.
2. In view of the nature of disputes involved, both these writ petitions are taken up and disposed of by a common judgment. For the sake of clarity, the description of parties and pleadings shall be as stated in W.P.(C) No.16565/2021, unless otherwise stated.
3. A brief history of the disputes involved can be stated as under: WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :8: The petitioners claim that they and the party respondents are members of Kuttiyil family, Mynagappally. In the year 1950, the Milad-e-Sherief Memorial UP School was established. While the petitioners contend that the school was started by the Kuttiyil family, the 10th respondent contends on the strength of a Partition Deed No. 1238/1/1952, that the school and the properties were set apart to the share of C.M. Ibrahimkutty who is the father of the 10th respondent, Smt.Umaiba Beevi. It is undisputed that C.M. Ibrahimkutty was the founder Manager and in the year 1958, Smt. Aisha Beevi was made the Manager and she continued to function as such till 1996, in which year she passed away. After her death, C.M. Ibrahimkutty became the Manager of the school. On 07.03.1997, Sri. C.M.Ibrahimkutty married Smt. Misriyakunju, the 11th respondent.
4. It appears that disputes arose between Ibrahimkutty and his children which led to the institution of various suits and writ petitions. Finally, the parties entered into a compromise while W.A.No.2664/2002 was pending before this Court and a Partition Deed registered as Document No.3210/2002 dated 25.10.2002 was executed. In view of the execution of the partition deed, this Court by judgment dated 08.11.2002, recorded the compromise and the Writ Appeal was disposed of. C.M. Ibrahimkutty WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :9: continued to be the Manager of the School. Though various writ petitions were filed seeking the removal of Ibrahimkutty, pursuant to orders passed by this Court, the DGE considered the matter and rejected the request. Ibrahimkutty passed away on 03.03.2020.
5. According to the petitioners, they realized that the 10th respondent and others had created a document canceling the trust allegedly formed by Ibrahimkutty and they were initiating steps for appointing a Manager in violation of the provisions of Chapter III of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959. In the said circumstances, they rushed to this Court and filed W.P.(C) No.14678/2020 seeking directions to the DEO to hear the petitioners before action is taken for approval of the Manager of Milad-e-Sherief Higher Secondary School, Mynagappally and this Court disposed of the matter by issuing directions.
6. While so, the petitioners received information that the 10th respondent was initiating steps to get the by-law of the school approved without involving them. In the said circumstances, they approached this Court and filed W.P.(C) No.19977/2020 seeking issuance of directions to hear the petitioners before approval has been granted. The petitioners contend that without affording an opportunity to them, the 6th respondent granted WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :10: approval as per order dated 11.12.2020. Records reveal that this was pursuant to the interim order dated 30.11.2020 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19977/2020. Being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the 4th respondent. When W.P.(C) No. 19977/2020 came up for final consideration, this Court by judgment dated 21.12.2020, directed the competent statutory authority to hear the petitioners as well as the contesting parties and pass appropriate orders. In terms of the directions issued, the 5th respondent heard the matter and by Ext.P2 order, affirmed the order passed by the 6th respondent. Challenging Ext.P2, the petitioners have preferred Ext.P3 revision petition before the Secretary to Government.
7. Immediately thereafter, the petitioners approached this Court and filed W.P.(C) No.9090/2021, and by Ext.P4 judgment dated 08.04.2021, a learned Single Judge of this Court directed the Secretary to Government to hear all concerned parties and pass final orders. It was also made clear that till final orders are passed, the District Educational Officer ("DEO") shall continue to function as Manager.
8. The petitioners contend that while submitting the application for approval of the by-law, the 10th respondent produced notarized copies of consent deeds of certain legal heirs who were admittedly abroad and who WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :11: had no occasion to come down to India and sign on the consent deeds. It is contended by the petitioners that the fact that the consent deeds are fabricated, was brought to the notice of the 6th respondent. However, ignoring the vehement objections of the petitioners, the 6th respondent proceeded to approve the by-law by order dated 11.12.2020. In the said circumstances, they filed a detailed representation before the Government and as is evident from Ext.P5, directions have been issued to the DGE to conduct an enquiry with the vigilance wing and to take an appropriate decision. The petitioners contend that they have preferred Ext.P6 to P8 representations before respondents 1 and 8 but for reasons best known to them, no action is being taken.
9. The petitioners contend that the DGE has now passed an order, (Ext.P10 produced in W.P.(C) No. 20234/2021) informing them that no action can be taken by the Department based on the representation submitted by them. It is further stated that instead of conducting a proper enquiry, the 4th respondent has called for a report from the Deputy Director, against whom allegations are raised, and has exonerated the officer.
10. It is in the afore circumstances W.P.(C) No.16565/2021 is filed seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to direct an investigation as sought WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :12: for in Exts.P6 and P7 and also for a further direction to the 3rd respondent not to pass final orders in Ext.P3 revision petition without getting a final report as sought for in Exts.P6 and P7.
11. W.P.(C) No.20234/2021 is filed seeking to quash Ext.P10 and for issuance of a direction to the DGE to conduct an enquiry afresh and to take a decision.
12. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 10th respondent in W.P.(C) No.16565/2021 controverting the assertions. In the counter affidavit, it has asserted that as per the partition deed dated 08.03.1952, the school and its properties were set apart to the share of Sri. C.M.Ibrahimkutty. It is contended that after arriving at the compromise while W.A.No.2664/2022 was pending, late Ibrahimkutty, his daughters, and brothers of Smt. Aisha Beevi executed Ext.R10(b) partition deed as per which, Ibrahimkutty has relinquished all his rights in the property and created a life interest with a right to take income and to continue as Manager till his death. They contend that the petitioners and the 11th respondent have no right over the property after the execution of the partition deed. It is further contended that after the death of Smt. Aisha Beevi and the execution of the partition deed, the management of the school has become a corporate educational agency with WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :13: the parties of the partition deed being its members. It is further stated that a Will was executed and registered as Document No.11 of 2012 dated 20.02.2012 of the Karunagappally Sub Registry, which was later cancelled as per Cancellation Deed dated 22.07.2015.
13. It is further stated that this Court, while W.P.(C) No.19977/2020 was pending consideration, granted permission to the 6th respondent to proceed with a hearing with regard to the approval of bye-laws of the school after affording an opportunity to both sides. Directions were also issued not to pass final orders without getting orders from this Court. According to the learned counsel, it was in strict compliance with the directions that the 6th respondent had passed orders approving the by-law. In view of the contentions raised by the petitioners, the 6th respondent had insisted that the final approval order of the by-law shall be passed only after submission of the Power of Attorney of the parties who were staying abroad as authorized by the concerned embassies. This course adopted by the 6th respondent was approved by this Court as well. The 10th respondent asserts that the assertions made in the complaint filed by the petitioners are false.
14. A counter affidavit has been filed by Smt. Misriyakunju, the 11th respondent in W.P.(C)No. 20234/2021, wherein she states that the Partition WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :14: Deed dated 25.10.2002 was illegally created in the name of late C.M.Ibrahimkutty, without the knowledge of the answering respondent. It is further stated that she has instituted O.S.No.359/2020 before the Munsiff Court, Karunagappally seeking a declaration that the deed is null and void and the same is pending.
15. Sri. K.S.Bharathan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners painstakingly took this Court through the sequence of events and it is submitted that approval was granted by the 6th respondent based on documents that were forged. According to the learned counsel, detailed complaints have been forwarded and the same is pending consideration before the Vigilance Department. Before getting a proper report, if the revision petition filed by the petitioners is heard, serious prejudice would be caused.
16. Sri. Mohammed Shah, the learned counsel appearing for the 11th respondent supported the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.
17. Sri. S.Sreekumar, the learned senior counsel appearing for the 10th respondent would point out that the attempt of the petitioners is to protract the entire matter and to delay the proceedings initiated by them and WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :15: pending before the secretary. The learned senior counsel would refer to the proceedings in W.P.(C) No.19977/2020 and it is argued that by an interim order dated 14.10.2020, this Court ordered that the Deputy Director of Education would be at liberty to continue with the hearing with respect to the bye-laws of the school after affording necessary opportunity to all sides. The order passed by the Deputy Director was produced before this Court in a sealed cover and the same was perused. This Court noted the assertion of the petitioners that the Power of Attorney that was later produced as directed by the Deputy Director, was intended to cover a forgery. However, the assertions of the petitioners were rejected and directions were issued to the Deputy Director to deal with the approval of bye-laws after considering all relevant aspects. It was in the said circumstances that orders were passed. According to the learned Senior counsel, there is no justification for delaying the consideration of the revision petition filed by the petitioners themselves.
18. The learned Government pleader pointed out that based on the representation filed by the petitioners, the Government has directed the DGE to consider the grievances and to take a decision. It is pointed out that the Deputy Director had granted approval only after the parties had produced WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :16: the Power of Attorney duly authenticated from the respective consulates.
19. I have considered the submissions advanced and have perused the entire records.
20. The contention of the petitioners essentially is that while submitting the application for approval of the bye-law of the school, the parties had produced before the Deputy Director notarised consent deeds of persons who were residing abroad. The petitioners assert that the documents which were produced before the 1st authority was forged. I find that on the strength of the representations filed by the petitioners, the Government has issued directions to the DGE to conduct an enquiry and to take appropriate action. The said proceedings have not been concluded to date.
21. The question is whether the Secretary to Government should be interdicted from hearing the revision petition filed by the petitioners on the ground of the pending inquiry. The records placed before this Court reveals that W.P(C) No.19977/2020 was filed by the petitioners herein seeking a direction to the Educational Authorities to ensure that no appointments or admissions are made till a Manager is appointed based on the alleged Will and incidental reliefs. When the said writ petition had come up for WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :17: consideration on 14.10.2020, this Court had passed the following order.
"Sri. V. Philip Mathews, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, seeks week's time to file reply pleadings to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.
I, therefore, adjourn this matter to be called on 28.10.2010. However, clarifying that the Deputy Director of Education is at liberty to continue with the hearing with respect to the bylaws of the school after affording necessary opportunities to both sides. But, final orders shall not be issued without further orders from this Court."
22. Later when the matter came up for consideration on 03.11.2020, the following order was passed.
"The learned government pleader submits that the Deputy Director of Education has already heard the parties but has not issued final orders in view of the interim directions of this Court dated 14.10.2020.
I, therefore, direct the Deputy Director of Education to issue final orders, but not to communicate the same to the parties; and to place it before this Court in a sealed cover."
23. In pursuance of the same, the Deputy Director considered the contentions advanced by both sides. Ext.R10 order was passed on 30.11.2020 and the Deputy Director came to the conclusion based on materials that the bye-law prepared for the management of the school based on the provisions in Deed No.3210/02 can be considered for approval. WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :18: However, it was further ordered that the final approval order of the bye-law will be issued only after the concerned parties submit the documents granting Power of Attorney of those parties who were staying abroad as authorized by the concerned embassies.
24. When the matter was taken up on 30.11.2020, this Court issued the following order.
"The learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.Nisha Bose, submits that final orders in terms of the directions of this Court, dated 16.11.2020, will be issued soon. She submits that the proceedings have been delayed on account of the fact that the powers-of attorney of the trustees have not yet been produced.
2. The learned Senior Counsel for the party respondents, Sri.S.Sreekumar, submits that it is only on account of the national holidays in UAE that the powers-of attorney have not been produced and that the same will be produced at the earliest.
3. Sri.V.Philip Mathews, learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that the powers-of-attorney that has been now called upon to be produced is, in fact, intended to cover up a forgery and therefore, prayed that the Deputy Director be not permitted to complete the process.
4. Even when I hear Sri.Philip Mathews as afore, I am certain that this Court will not be justified in considering the matter as if I am the first Authority to deal with the approval of the by-laws of the Trust. I am certain that the competent Authority will look into all these aspects while final orders are issued, for which necessary WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :19: opportunity will also be given to the parties.
I, therefore, adjourn this matter to be called on 21.12.2020; within which time, the Deputy Director will ensure that the final orders are placed before this Court."
25. A perusal of the order would reveal that this Court repelled the contention of the petitioners that the Deputy Director shall not be permitted to conclude the process.
26. When the writ petition was taken up for final consideration, this Court was not impressed with the contention of the petitioners that they were not afforded an opportunity of being heard. Taking note of the fact that a revision petition has been preferred before the higher authority, appropriate directions were issued to dispose of the same.
27. In terms of the directions, the DGE has considered the matter and has issued Ext.P11 order (produced in W.P.(C) No.20234/2021). Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred a revision petition before the Secretary to Government, which is pending consideration. In the said revision petition, the petitioner has admittedly raised all their contentions. I find that the petitioners themselves had approached this Court and this Court by judgment dated 08.04.2021 in W.P.(C) No.9090/2021 has issued directions to the Secretary of Government to hear and pass orders on the revision petition WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :20: and has also ordered that the DEO shall function as the Manager till orders are passed.
28. Now the question is whether the consideration of the revision petition should be delayed due to the pendency of the inquiry. From the sequence of events above, it would be evident that the Deputy Director had directed the parties to produce the Power of Attorney of those parties who were staying abroad as authorized by the concerned embassies. The said course was approved by this Court. In that view of the matter, the procedure adopted by the Deputy Director cannot be said to be improper. As to whether the parties had produced forged consent deeds for the purpose of securing approval is being enquired into by the appropriate authorities and if they find that some malpractice was committed, appropriate action can be taken against the persons responsible. However, since the Deputy Director before finally issuing the order of approval had directed the parties to produce authenticated power of attorney and as the order was passed after perusing the same, the said order cannot be faulted on that count. Merely because, an inquiry is pending in respect of an earlier transaction, I find no reason to keep the proceedings in limbo.
29. In that view of the matter, I find no reason to interfere in these WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :21: writ petitions. The Secretary to Government shall expedite the process as directed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.9090/2021 and take a decision. While taking a decision, all the contentions advanced by the petitioners in the Revision Petition shall be adverted to. This shall be independent of the inquiry initiated at the instance of the petitioners and pending before the Vigilance Department. If the Vigilance authorities come to the conclusion that some malpractice has been carried out, they shall recommend appropriate action.
These writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE PS/20/6/2022 WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :22: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20234/2021 PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT 16.11.2020 IN WPC NO.19977 OF 2020.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER NO.ETI/8146/20/DGE DATED 29.03.2021 PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ON THE BASIS OF THE HEARING CONDUCTED ON 19.01.2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT DATED 30.03.2021 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS) Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.04.2021 IN WPC NO.9090 OF 2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 21.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 07.12.2020.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON 09.07.2021.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTORATE OF VIGILANCE AND ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 23.07.2021, WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :23: IN RESPONSE TO A REPRESENTATION DATED 09.07.2021.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 13.08.2021 IN WPC NO.
16565 OF 2021.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. V.A (1)/ 210337/DGE/K.DIS DATED 03.08.2021 ISSUED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO. B3/6618/2020 SUBMITTED BY 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.08.2021.
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE BYE LAW DATED 4/5/2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 10TH RESPONDENT AND OTHERS BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT STATEMENT DATED 1/10/2020 BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT IN FURTHERANCE OF EXHIBIT P12 Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 8/3/2020 Exhibit P15 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL JUDGMENT DATED 21.12.2020 IN W.P.(C) NO.19977 OF 2020 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS Exhibit R11(a) TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO.359/2020 PENDING BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, KARUNAGAPALLY DATED 02/11/2020 WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021 :24: APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16565/2021 PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT 16.11.2020 IN WPC NO.19977
OF 2020
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF FINAL ORDER
NO.ETI/8146/20/DGE DATED 29.03.2021
PASSED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ON THE
BASIS OF THE HEARING CONDUCTED ON
19.01.2021
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL
EDUCATION (F) DEPARTMENT DATED
30.03.2021 (WITHOUT EXHIBITS)
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
08.04.2021 IN WPC NO.9090 OF 2021
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
21.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
07.12.2020
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE
PETITIONERS TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
09.07.2021
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED TO THE
2ND PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE
DIRECTORATE OF VIGILANCE AND
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:25:
ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 23.07.2021, IN
RESPONSE TO A REPRESENTATION DATED
09.07.2021
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL JUDGMENT DATED
21.12.2020 IN WPC NO.19977 OF 2020
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R 10(a) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P NO.1174 OF
2000 DATED 04.10.2002 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(b) TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.3210 OF 2002
DATED 25.10.2002
EXHIBIT R 10(c) TRUE COPY JUDGMENT DATED 08.11.2002 IN
W.A.NO.2664 OF 2002 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(d) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.14678 OF 2020 DATED 21.07.2020 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(e) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)
NO.20350 OF 2020 DATED 30.09.2020 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT
EXHIBIT R 10(f) TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN W.P.(C) NO.19977
OF 2020 DATED 14.10.2020 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(g) TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN W.P.(C) NO.19977
OF 2020 DATED 03.11.2020 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(h) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B3/6618/2020 DATED
11.11.2020 OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
WP(C) NOs.20234 & 16565 OF 2021
:26:
EXHIBIT R 10(i) TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN W.P.(C) NO.19977
OF 2020 DATED 16.11.2020 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT.
EXHIBIT R 10(j) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 05.11.2021
ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE
PRINCIPAL, MILADE SHERIFF BOYS HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, MYNAGAPALLY
EXHIBIT R 10(k) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 26.11.2021
ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE
PRINCIPAL, MILADE SHERIFF BOYS HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, MYNAGAPALLY
EXHIBIT R 10(l) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 01.12.2021
ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE
PRINCIPAL, MILADE SHERIFF HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, MYNAGAPALLY.
EXHIBIT R10(m) TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 17.01.2022
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER/10TH
RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT.