Kerala High Court
P. George Varghese vs The State Of Kerala on 25 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
WA NO. 1138 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 05.08.2022 IN WP(C) 25095/2022 OF HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN WP(C):
P.GEORGE VARGHESE
AGED 56 YEARS
MANAGER, SAINT IGNATIUS VHSS, KANJIRAMATTOM, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT - 682 315.
BY ADVS.
N.RAGHURAJ
SAYUJYA
VIVEK MENON
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WP(C):
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -
695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
3 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD - 682 030.
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
ERNAKULAM - 682 030.
5 PETER N. CHACKO,
NEDUMATTATHIL HOUSE, CHETHIKKODE P.O., KANJIRAMATTOM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 682 315.
SRI SAIGI JACOB PALATTY-SR.GP
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.08.2022,
ALONG WITH WP(C) 25095/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 3RD BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 25095 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
P. GEORGE VARGHESE
AGED 56 YEARS
MANAGER, SAINT IGNATIUS VHSS, KANJIRAMATTOM, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT - 682 315.
BY ADVS.
P.RAVINDRAN (SR.)
SAYUJYA
VIVEK MENON
N.RAGHURAJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -
695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
3 REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR
OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION,
KAKKANAD - 682 030.
4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
ERNAKULAM - 682 030.
5 PETER N. CHACKO,
NEDUMATTATHIL HOUSE, CHETHIKKODE P.O., KANJIRAMATTOM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT- 682 315.
BY ADVS.
Martin Jose
P.PRIJITH
THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
R.GITHESH
AJAY BEN JOSE
MANJUNATH MENON
SACHIN JACOB AMBAT
ANNA LINDA V.J
HARIKRISHNAN S.
S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.08.2022, ALONG WITH WA.1138/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
1
ALEXANDER THOMAS & SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
==================
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 &
WA No.1138 of 2022
(arising out of the order dated 05.08.2022 in WP(C) No.25095 of 2022)
==================
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022
JUDGMENT
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
Since the afore mentioned WA arises out of the impugned interim
order rendered on 05.08.2022 in the afore captioned Writ Petition (Civil)
WP(C) No.25095/2022, these cases are disposed of on the basis of a
common judgment.
WP(C) No.25095/2022
2. The case projected in the above Writ proceedings are broadly
as follows:
"The petitioner is the Manager of St. Ignatius Vocational & Higher Secondary
School, Kanjiramattom ("the School" for short). The management of the School is
vested in a Managing Committee elected by the Parishioners of the Church which
elect the Manager of the School from among themselves. The constitution of the
educational agency of the School and its management are governed by the provisions
of the Bye-Laws/Constitution approved by the 3rd respondent vide Ext. P1 Order
dated 10.10.1973. Ext. P1 bye laws interalia provide that the term of the Managing
Committee shall be 5 years and that if a new Managing Committee is not elected even
after the expiry of the term of the previous committee, the said committee can
continue in office till an elected committee is duly constituted. The petitioner was first
appointed as the Manager of the School in 2010 for a period of 5 years in terms of
Ext. P1 bye laws, which was duly approved by the 4 respondent vide Ext. P2 order.
The 5th respondent, a rival claimant, unsuccessfully assailed the said order before all
the statutory authorities and later before this Hon'ble Court. A new Managing
Committee of the School was elected in 2015, which in turn elected the petitioner was
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
again as the Manager for a further term of 5 years. As per Ext. P2 order the 4th
respondent approved the appointment of the petitioner as the Manager. However,
the DPI interfered with the said order which is stayed by-B the Hon'ble Court in W.P.
(c). No. 2719 of 2016. Since no elections were conducted thereafter, the petitioner and
the Managing Committee whose term of office co-terminus, accordingly continued in
officer by virtue of the provisions of Ext. P1 bye law, without any objection from the
educational authorities. The petitioner's School is having 8 batches of Higher
Secondary courses with an Intake of 400 students. As per Ext. P5 prospectus for
Admission to the Higher Secondary courses in Aided/Government Schools, which
bear the approval of the 1st respondent Government, 20% of the total seats in the
Higher Secondary Courses in aided Schools, are set apart as management quota
which could be filled up by respective managements from the list of students
prepared by them. In terms of the said prospectus, the petitioner has selected
students against the seats set apart as management quota in the Higher Secondary
courses conducted in the Schools. However, to the shock and surprise of the
petitioner, he came across Ext. P7 notification issued by the 2nd respondent in the
website of the Higher Secondary Department on 02.08.2022, whereby it is ordered
that the management quota seats in the aided Schools with respect to which there are
management disputes/court cases shall be converted as open merit seats. It is
submitted that the 2nd respondent has no authority in law to tinker with the
provisions of Ext. P4 prospectus which is approved by the Government. Ext. P7 order
is therefore, without jurisdiction. That apart through Ext. P7 order the 2nd
respondent has taken away a vested right conferred by Ext. P7 to the aided School
managements without notice and without affording an opportunity of being heard to
them."
3. It is in the light of these averments and contentions that the
petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Civil) with the following
prayers:
"(i) To issue writ in the nature of certiorari or such other writ,
direction or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P7 and to quash
the same.
(ii) to issue a writ of Mandamus or such other writ, direction
or order declaring that Ext.P7 is without jurisdiction, illegal,
unconstitutional and violative of the principles of natural justice.
(iii) to issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or such other
writ, direction or order commanding the respondents not to interfere
with the right of the petitioner to effect admission to the 20% Managment
Quota seats in the Higher Secondary Courses in the St.Ignatius
Vocational & Higher Secondary School, Kanjiramattom.
(iv) award to the petitioner the costs of these proceedings and;
(v) grant such other and furtherreliefs as are just, proper and
necessary or may be prayed for."
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
4. The learned Single Judge has initially granted interim order
dated 03.08.2022 in this WP(C), ordering that the enforcement of the
impugned Ext.P7 order for merger of the management quota seats with
the open merit quota seats shall be kept in abeyance till 05.08.2022.
Later, when the case came up for consideration on 05.08.2022, it was
submitted on behalf of the respondent State authorities that the
allotment of seats pursuant to the merger ordered as per the impugned
Ext.P7 order dated 01.08.2022 has already been completed on
03.08.2022, even before the copy of the initial interim order on
03.08.2022 was received by the respondent State authorities on
04.08.2022. On this basis, the learned Single Judge has vacated the
interim order granted on 03.08.2022, on the premise that the impugned
proceedings at Ext.P7 has already been enforced as against the writ
petitioner. Being aggrieved thereby, the writ petitioner has filed the afore
captioned Writ Appeal, to impugn the interim order dated 05.08.2022
vacating the initial interim order granted on 03.08.2022. It has now been
revealed that the allotment cum admission process in respect of the 20%
management quota seats allotted to the school in question has not been
completed and there are still vacancies. Hence, both the WA and the
WP(C) has come up for consideration before us.
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
5. Heard Sri.P.Raveendran, learned Senior Counsel, instructed
by Sri.N.Reghuraj, learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner,
Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for
official respondents 1 to 4. Though R-5, who is stated to be a rival
claimant to the petitioner for the managership of the school, has been
duly served, there is no appearance on his behalf, in spite of due service
of notice on him by special messenger. Shri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior
Counsel instructed by Shri.P.Martin Jose, learned counsel has sought for
impleadment of a third party, the said plea is seriously opposed. As the
rival claimant (R-5) has not entered appearance despite notice and in
view of the admitted stand of the respondent educational authorities in
Ext.P-9 dt.16.3.2022 that the petitioner is continuing as Manager of the
school by the operation of Clause 4(h) of Ext.P-1 bye-laws, we are not
inclined to allow the third party impleadment. However, we have
elaborately heard Shri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel and
Shri.P.Martin Jose, learned counsel.
6. We have elaborately heard both sides. After conclusion of the
submissions, we suggested to both sides that the mere factum of
existence of management disputes by itself cannot be a ground to deny
the facility of management quota seats to an aided school which is under
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
a private management. The core reason is that the factum regarding the
existence and reality that the school is an aided management school,
does not get obliterated, merely because of pendency of management
disputes. Hence we suggested that it is in the interest of both the rival
factions that the right of the management and the community in question
may be better subserved if it is ensured that some mechanism is evolved
to avail the management quota seats in a reasonable manner. We also
suggested that we are apprised that ordinarily the management quota
seats can be filled up on the basis of the discretion of the management
from amongst applicants who fulfill the minimum eligibility norms for
getting admission for Plus Two course in terms of the prospectus. Hence,
out of equitable considerations and also to effectuate public interest and
to subserve the interest of the student community and also at the same
time to ensure that the interest of the management to avail the
management quota seats is fulfilled, that it may be better that the
petitioner may sponsor the names of ten candidates for each vacancy in
the management quota to the respondent DEO and it is for the
respondent DEO to fill up the management quota seats from amongst
such eligible and sponsored candidates, but purely on the basis of inter se
merit to be determined on the basis of their SSLC marks as is otherwise
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
done. Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by
Sri.P.Martin Jose, learned Advocate has fairly submitted on the basis of
instructions that their party would agree to such suggestion made by this
Court, provided it is only for this year and provided further that the
orders and directions of this Court shall not in any manner affect either
the pending church disputes or the pending management disputes in
other pending litigative proceedings either in the Civil Court or in writ
proceedings etc. Sri. P.Raveendran, learned Senior Counsel, instructed
by Sri.N.Reghuraj, appearing for the petitioner also does not appear to
have serious objection to the said course of action proposed by us. But, it
is pointed out on behalf of the petitioners that the admission process has
reached almost the fag end and it may not be possible to get ten students
for each vacancy, especially in courses which may not have much
demand like Home Science. The official respondents also do not appear
to have much serious objection to the course of action suggested by us in
view of the aspects mentioned herein above. It is also pointed out on
behalf of the petitioners that if this course of action is adopted by this
Court, then all issues raised in this writ proceedings may be left open to
be raised and decided on appropriate occasion if it is so warranted. So
also, both Sri.P.Raveendran, learned Senior Counsel and Sri.
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel would insist that the directions and
orders to be so passed by this Court, need not be taken as a precedent for
next year and if any such issues arises, the same will have to be decided
afresh and untrammeled and uninfluenced in any manner by the course
of action adopted by us. The petitioner would also point out that this
Court may order that the impugned Ext.P7 proceedings, to the limited
extent it is directed against the petitioner's school, shall not apply as
against it for this academic year. There will not be any serious issue
regarding the said submission for the simple fact that Ext.P7 is made
applicable only for the present academic year and the directions to be
issued by us will certainly supersede or modify Ext.P7 to the limited
extent, it is directed as against the school management in question.
Coming to the facts of the case, it appears that the above school has 5
subjects at the Plus Two course level for admission to standard XI. The
details are as follows:
(i) Altogether there are 180 seats sanctioned for
Bio-Maths course (Biology-Mathematics combination).
Thus, the management quota seats, computed on the
basis of 20%, comes to 36 seats. It is submitted by the
learned Senior Government Pleader, on the basis of factual
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
instructions that all the 36 seats in Bio-Maths are now
available for management quota.
(ii) 60 seats are altogether sanctioned for Bio-
Home Science Course. So 12 seats are set apart in the
20% management quota seats. According to the official
respondents that now only 3 seats are available.
(iii) For Maths-Computer Science course,
altogether 120 seats have been sanctioned. Management
quota seats allotted is 24 seats (20% of 120 seats). It is
submitted on behalf of the official respondents that now
21 seats for this course are available.
(iv) For Humanities course, the total number of
seats sanctioned is 60. Management quota seats will
come to 12 seats computed at 20%. It is pointed out by
the official respondents that 8 seats are now available.
(v) Further, that for Commerce subject, 60 seats
have been sanctioned and management quota seats
would be 12 seats (20% of 60 seats). Further the official
respondents would submit that 7 seats are now available.
7. Sri. N.Reghuraj, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
would point out that the factual instruction, that could be ascertained
from the Principal of the school is that more seats are available in the
20% management quota for each of these five courses than what has been
now submitted on behalf of the official respondents. Per contra, learned
Senior Government Pleader would point out that the said data relied on
by the petitioner may not be fully accurate, inasmuch as the seats
apportioned to SC/ST reservation quota and differently abled reservation
quota have to be reckoned for computing outstanding vacancy, etc. The
admissions are on the fag end of finalization and there is no necessity for
us to adjudicate on these factual issues. However we would add a caveat
that in case the petitioner has any case that there are more vacant seats
to be filled up in the management quota than what has been now
submitted before us by the official respondents, then the petitioner and
the Principal may give the facts and figures in that regard before the 4 th
respondent DEO, who may ascertain that and may take necessary action
based on the actual factual aspects, which have been disclosed. While
passing orders in this writ proceedings, for regulating admission for this
year, we are of the firm view that out of equitable consideration and also
for adherence to public interest, it would be only fair and right in exercise
of our discretion that it is ordered that sufficient number of candidates is
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
sponsored by the petitioner in the available vacancies in the management
quota for each of the respective five courses, to the 4 th respondent DEO,
who may thereafter select the eligible students in the management quota,
purely on the basis of their inter se merit as disclosed in their SSLC
marks. Thereafter, the respondent DEO may give the list of selected
candidates in the management quota, to the principal of the aided Higher
Secondary School concerned, who will ensure that such students selected
by the DEO as above are given admission in the management quota.
Accordingly, it is ordered that petitioner may sponsor 10 eligible students
for each of the vacancies for each of the five courses mentioned above to
the DEO along with the details of the applicants concerned as well as
their marks in the SSLC examination alongwith the copies of the
marksheet in the said examination etc, without any further delay.
Thereafter, the 4th respondent DEO will ascertain the details and ensure
that students are selected for admission in the above management quota
vacancies for each of the five courses mentioned above without any
further delay and instructions may be given by the 4th respondent DEO to
the Principal concerned to give admission to the students. Thereupon,
the Principal of the St.Ignatius Vocational and Higher Secondary School,
Kanjiramattam, Ernakulam District will ensure that admission is granted
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
to such students selected by the 4th respondent DEO to the management
quota seats for each of the five courses without any further delay.
8. It is further ordered that the impugned Ext.P7 order dated
01.08.2022 issued by the 2nd respondent Director of General Education
for the Academic year 2022-23, to the limited extent it affects the school
management in question will stand superseded and modified by the
aforesaid directions. In otherwords, the impugned directions at Ext.P7
ordering the merger of the 20% management quota seats with the open
merit quota seats will stand rescinded and set aside to the extent it is in
relation to the available vacancies in the management quota seats. These
directions and orders by itself will not in any manner affect the
admissions to be made for the next year in the management quota or will
not affect in any manner, the Church disputes and the management
disputes, pending in various civil litigations and writ proceedings.
Further it is also ordered that all contentions are available in law to the
petitioner, the respondents, as well as the party represented by
Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Sri.P.Martin Jose
are left open to be raised and decided in appropriate cases in the future,
if it is so warranted. Further, if it is not feasible for the petitioner to
sponsor ten candidates for each of the vacancies in each of the 5 courses
WP(C) No.25095 of 2022 & WA No.1138 of 2022
above due to paucity of candidates, then the candidates that may be
sponsored by him could be less than that. In that regard, petitioner
should give a detailed report before the 4th respondent DEO as to the
circumstances as to why he could not sponsor ten candidates per vacancy, as
above.
With these observations and directions, the above WP(C) will stand
finally disposed of.
WA No.1138/2022
The above WA has arisen out of the aforementioned interim order
dated 05.08.2022 rendered by the learned Single Judge in the above
WP(C). In view of the disposal of the main matter in the WP(C), as per
the afore judgment, no further directions and orders are required in this
Writ Appeal separately and hence the WA is only to be closed.
With these observations and directions the above WA will stand
disposed of.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE
Nsd
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25095/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. K-DIS.
G4-22255/73 DATED 10.10.1973 AND THE APPROVED
BYE-LAWS/CONSTITUTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY
UNDER THE ST. IGNATIUS ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH,
KANJIRAMATTOM.
Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER
NO.135/4851/10/K.DIS. DT. 18.09.2010,
APPOINTING THE PETITIONER AS THE MANAGER IN
2010, ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT BEARING ORDER NO.
B5/3173/2015/K.DIS. DATED 23.05.2015, APPROVING
THE APPOINTMENT OF THE PETITIONER AS MANAGER.
Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT BY BEARING ORDER NO. B5/25006/2021
DATED 10.09.2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION
TO HIGHER SECONDARY COURSES
Exhibit P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO. I.C.T
CELL/1771/D.G.E H.S.S.E/2022 DT.19.07.2022 OF
THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID ORDER BEARING NO.
I.C.T CELL/1771/D.G.E H.S.S.E/2022
DT.01.08.2022 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P8 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER BEARING
NO.E3/3580/2020 DATED 17.04.2021.
Exhibit P9 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF HE LETTER BEARING
NO.B5/1746/2022 DATED 16.03.2022, ISSUED BY THE
4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.G.O.(RT)
2056/2022/GEN DATED 26/03/2022.
Exhibit P11 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE VERIFICATION REPORT.
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R 6(a) True copy of G.O.(Rt).No.2002/12/G.Edn. dated
30.04.2012 of the 1st respondent
EXHIBIT R 6(b) True copy of judgment in W.A.No.1011 of 2013
dated 17.03.2014 of the Hon'ble High Court of
Kerala
EXHIBIT R 6(c) True copy of Order dated 18-07-2014 in S.L.P.
(C). No.16097 of 2014 of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India
EXHIBIT R 6(d) True copy of order dated 27-08-2015 in S.L.P.
(C). No. 16097 of 2014 of Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India
EXHIBIT R 6(e) True copy of order bearing No.ECC31/40596/
2014/ DPI/KDis dated 04-01-2016 of the
Additional Director or Public Instructions
(General)
