Kerala High Court
C.H.Muhammed Koya Memorial ... vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2021
WP(C) NO. 19362 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 19362 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
C.H.MUHAMMED KOYA MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
KAVUMPADY, THILLANKERI P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGER, T.MAJEED, S/O. KUNHAMU HAJI, AGED 59
YEARS, BAITH UL FALAH, THILLANKERI P.O., IRITTY
TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670702.
BY ADVS.
R.SURENDRAN
S.MAYUKHA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
3 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, PAYYAMBALAM,
KANNUR-670001.
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
THALASSERY EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT, THALASSERY,
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670101.
5 A.P.KUNHAMMED,
AGED 74 YEARS
S/O. MOIDEEN HAJI, RESIDING AT CHIKKIAT HOUSE,
KAVUMPADI, THILLANKERI P.O., IRITTY TALUK,
KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670702.
WP(C) NO. 19362 OF 2021 2
6 THE PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE,
C.H.MUHAMMAD KOYA MEMORIAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
KAVUMPADY, THILLANKERI P.O., IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR
DISTRICT, PIN-670702.
BY ADV M.SASINDRAN
SMT NISHA BOSE, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 19362 OF 2021 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner claims that he is the de facto Manager of the CH
Muhammad Koya Memorial Higher Secondary School, Kavumpady. The said
school is run by the CH Muhammed Koya Memorial Education Development
Committee. It is the case of the petitioner that the school is a minority
educational institution, recognized as per Ext.P1 certificate issued by the
National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions. The grievance of
the petitioner concerns Ext.P10 order as per which the 2nd respondent has
ordered that in schools where there are management disputes, the
management quota seats are to be appropriated towards merit seats.
2. The petitioner contends that the 4th respondent had recognized
Sri.P.K.Ali as the Manager of the School as per Ext.P2 order dated
31.05.2018. Though the said order was challenged before the DPI, the same
was confirmed by Ext.P3 order. Sri. P.K.Ali continued as Manager till
09.07.2019 on which day he passed away. It is stated that Ext.P2 and P3
orders are under challenge before this Court. According to the petitioner,
the working committee of the society had unanimously elected the petitioner
herein as the Manager and General Secretary on 15.07.2019. Later, by
Ext.P4 order dated 30.07.2020, the request made by the President of the
Society for approving the managership of the petitioner was rejected by the
4th respondent. The petitioner contends that an appeal was preferred before
the 2nd respondent and during the pendency of appeal, the parties had
approached this Court and by judgment dated 09.10.2020 this Court, taking
note of the pendency of various civil suits between the parties, closed the
writ petition leaving open all legal contentions. The petitioner asserts that
the application for approval of the Manager is pending before the 4th
respondent.
3. While so, the 1st respondent initiated the process for admission
to Plus One course in various schools in Kerala. On 03.09.2021, the 2nd
respondent has issued an order wherein it is stated that in those schools
where there are management disputes embroiled in court cases, the
management quota seats should be treated as general merit seats. The
petitioner school has been included in the said list. The petitioner contends
that the said order is illegal and improper as the issue regarding approval of
the Manager is pending before the 4th respondent. It is in the afore
circumstances, that the petitioner has rushed to this Court seeking
directions.
4. In view of the urgency highlighted by the learned counsel, this
Court had passed the following order when the matter had come up for
admission.
"The learned Government Pleader takes notice for respondents 1
to 4. Issue notice by special messenger to respondents 5 and 6. The
petitioner shall also serve a copy of the writ petition to Sri. M.Sasindran,
the learned counsel who appeared for the 5th respondent in W.P.(C)
No.16500/2021.
2. Sri.R.Surendran, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner would refer to Ext.P6 and it is pointed out that by the
aforesaid order, the 2nd respondent had approved the appointment of
the petitioner as Manager of the school for the period from 10.7.2019 to
21.10.2020. It is pointed out that the said order was challenged by the
5th respondent and the same is pending. Relying on the directions
issued by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, it is urged that the 4th
respondent was directed to take a decision on the application for
approval of the petitioner as Manager within a time frame of two
months. Reliance is also placed on Ext.P11 order dated 19.10.2020 and
it is contended that during the previous year the same issue as has been
raised in this writ petition had cropped up, and this Court had directed
the 2nd respondent to open the link for facilitating the admission of
students in the management quota. According to the learned counsel,
in view of the above, the respondents could not have appropriated the
management quota seats and converted the same to merit seats as has
been done on the strength of Ext.P10.
Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner, prima facie, it appears that the
petitioner has made out a good case on merits. Ext.P10 in so far as it
concerns the petitioner school will remain stayed for a period of one
week."
5. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 5th respondent. In the
counter affidavit it is stated that the management quota is to be filled up by
an approved Manager. However, there is no approved Manager in the
school. It is further stated that even in Ext.P6 order, which is relied on by
the petitioner to stake a claim for admitting students, it is stated that the
approval is only upto 21.10.2020. It is further stated that there is deliberate
suppression of material facts by the petitioner as all actions based on Ext.P6
were ordered to be deferred as per judgment dated 18.12.2020 in W.P.(C)
No.27853/2020. The party respondents contend that Sri.T.Majeed has not
been approved as the Manager hitherto and he is not entitled to perform any
function as the Manager. It is also stated that there exist serious disputes as
to who is to function as the Manager. Reliance is also placed on Ext.P8
judgment to substantiate that there are rival claims and disputes. According
to the 5th respondent, the petitioner is not entitled to assail Ext.P10 and
claim entitlement for making admission in the school in which he is not even
a Manager.
6. I have heard Sri.R.Surendran, the learned counsel for the
petitioner, Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned counsel for the 5th respondent and
Smt.Nisha Bose, the learned Senior Government Pleader.
7. On a perusal of the records, I find that there are serious
disputes as regards the managership of the school. The approval of
managership is pending before the concerned respondent. The records made
available only show that approval granted to the petitioner was only till
21.10.2020. It was after detailed enquiries that the 2nd respondent had
passed the impugned order appropriating the management quota seats
towards merit quota seats. In the facts and circumstances, I do not think
that the petitioner has made out any grounds for interfering with the said
appropriation.
This writ petition will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19362/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE DATED 9.10.2012
ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR
MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 31.5.2018
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT RECOGNISING
SRI. P.K.ALI AS THE MANAGER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.8.2018
ISSUED BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC
INSTRUCTIONS.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.7.2020
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT REJECTING
THE REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF SRI. T.MAJEED
AS MANAGER OF THE SCHOOL.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 9.10.2020
IN WP(C) NO.30583 OF 2018 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.E.M.4/9002/2020/DGE/K.DIS. DATED
27.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE SECOND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 9.4.2021
IN WP(C) NO.8479 OF 2021 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 3.9.2021
IN WP(C) NO.16500 OF 2021 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.ICT
CELL/1771/2/DGE-HSS/2021 DATED 2.9.2021
ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.9.2021,
BEARING NO.ICT CELL/ 1771/DGE-HSE/2021
ISSUED BY SECOND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
19.10.2020 IN WP(C) NO.17729 OF 2020 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
18.12.2020 IN WPC NO. 27853/2020 OF THIS
HON'BLE COURT.
