Kerala High Court
Blooming Buds Junior School vs Kerala State Commission For ... on 6 October, 2021
WP(C) NO. 5090 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 5090 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
BLOOMING BUDS JUNIOR SCHOOL,
CHURCH ROAD, KOODARANHI, REP BY THE PRINCIPAL
SMT. JULIE THOMAS, AGED 44 YEARS, W/O. THOMAS,
PENNAPARAMBIL, KOODARANHI P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 604.
BY ADV C.K.SREEJITH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE COMMISSION FOR PROTECTION OF CHILD
RIGHTS,
REP BY CHAIRMAN, TC 14/2036, VANROSS JUNCTION,
KERALA UNIVERSITY P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034.
2 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR, MANANCHIRA, CALICUT-673
001.
3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,
DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICE, PAVAMONY ROAD,
THAZHEKKOD, CALICUT-673 004.
4 THE HEADMASTER,
ST.SEBASTIANS L.P.SCHOOL, KOODARANHI,
KOZHIKODE-673 604.
5 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
6 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM-695
001.
WP(C) NO. 5090 OF 2021 2
*7 ADDL.R7.
THE DEO,
THAMARASSERY.
ADDL.R7 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT DATED
06-10-2021 IN W.P.(C)
SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 5090 OF 2021 3
JUDGMENT
Blooming Buds Junior School, a school functioning within the limits of
Koodaranhi through its Principal has approached this Court seeking directions
to the 2nd respondent to accept and dispose of Ext.P5 application submitted
on 18.02.2021 before the 3rd respondent.
2. The petitioner contends that they have been running the pre-
primary school from the year 2011 and that it was when demands were made
by the parents that they decided to upgrade the school. In the said
circumstances, they have submitted Ext.P5 application before the DEO. Since
no action was taken, they have approached this Court seeking the following
reliefs:
(i) issue writ of mandamus or such other writ or order quashing
Ext.P4 order passed by the 1st respondent.
(ii) issue writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction
directing the 2nd Respondent to accept and dispose of the
Ext.P5 enabling the petitioner to get approval for the school
as applied for.
(iii) issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ or direction to
the respondent not to take any further action till the Ext.P5
is disposed off.
3. A statement has been filed by the DEO, Thamarassery as directed
by this Court on 29.06.2021. According to the DEO, no application in the
nature of Ext.P5 is pending before the authorities. It is also stated that the
challenge mounted by the petitioner against Ext.P4 order also cannot be
sustained as the school is functioning without any recognition or concurrence
from the competent authority.
4. The petitioner has placed on record Ext.P7 information received
from the office of the Deputy Director of Education under the Right To
Information Act. It is borne out from Ext.P7 that the petitioner had in fact
submitted an application on 18.6.2021 seeking recognition and that the said
application was forwarded to the DEO, Kozhikode.
5. Sri. C.K.Sreejith, the learned counsel submitted that in view of
Ext.P7, the contention raised by the DEO, Thamarassery, in the statement
filed by him cannot be correct. The learned counsel, however, submits that
the petitioner has no difficulty in submitting a fresh application before the
DEO, Thamarassery, who is the jurisdictional authority and the request is to
issue necessary directions to the said authority to consider the application and
take a decision.
6. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that if
a fresh application is filed before the DEO, Thamarassry, there cannot be any
impediment in considering the same. It is however submitted that the DEO,
Thamarassery is not a party to the proceeding.
7. The DEO, Thamarassery is suo motu impleaded as additional 7th
respondent. The learned Government pleader shall take notice.
8. I have considered the submissions advanced.
9. Having considered the facts and circumstances and the
submissions made across the Bar, there will be a direction to the petitioner to
file an application seeking recognition before the DEO, Thamarassery within a
period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. If any
such application is received, the DEO, Thamarassery shall consider the same
and follow the procedure envisaged under law. The report/opinion shall be
forwarded to the 5th respondent within a further period of one month. The
5th respondent shall take a decision within a period of one month from the
date of receipt of report/ opinion from the DEO, Thamarassery.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 5090/2021
PETITIONER (S) EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY
THE HEADMASTER/4TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT DT 15.5.19.
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT
24.5.2019.
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT
20.6.2019.
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT DT 7.9.2020.
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT
18.2.2021 SUBMITTED THE DISTRICT EDUCATION
OFFICER.
EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED
05.07.2021 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF EDUCATION, CALICUT.
RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL
