Kerala High Court
A. Abdul Rasheed Kutty vs The Additional Chief Secretary on 29 June, 2022
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
