Kerala High Court

T.K.Suseela vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2024

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

WP(C) NO. 10088 OF 2013            1



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1945
                          WP(C) NO. 10088 OF 2013
PETITIONER/S:

      1        T.K.SUSEELA
               MANAGER, AMUP SCHOOL, VENGAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
               (KUTTIYIL HOUSE, P.O.VETTOM, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM
               DISTRICT - 676 102.)

      2        T.K.SHEEBA
               MANAGER, A U P SCHOOL, VAIKATHUR, MALAPPURAM
               DISTRICT, (KALISSERIL HOUSE, SOUTH NALUVAZHI P.O.,
               NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 683 513.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
               SRI.M.SAJJAD



RESPONDENT/S:

      1        STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVT. GENERAL EDUCATION
               DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
               001.

      2        DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
               DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 14.

      3        DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
               MALAPPURAM - 676 505.

      4        T.K.MADHAVI
               W/O.LATE T.R.KUNHIKRISHNAN, T.R.K. NIVAS,
 WP(C) NO. 10088 OF 2013                 2


               P.O.VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 552.

  ADDL.R5 SMT.SARADA T.K
          MANAGER, RMTTI, KOTTARAM, VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM
          DISTRICT. (IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT AS
          PER ORDER DATED 14.06.2016 IN IA NO. 6184/2016)

  ADDL.R6 SMT.DRAUPATHI, RESIDING AT MANNADATHU HOUSE,
          MEENCHANTHA P.O., CALICUT

  ADDL.R7 SMT.GEETHA, RESIDING AT VELIKKAL HOUSE,
          KOTTAPPURAM ,VALANCHERRY, MALAPPURAM.

  ADDL.R8 SMT.SHINI, RESIDING AT AS-12, PRATHEKSHA YERIK
          GARDEN APARTMENT,SAINIKA ASRAMAM ROAD, KUSUMAGIRI,
          KAKKANAD. (IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.RESPONDENT NOS.6 TO
          8 AS PER ORDER DATED 23.02.2024 IN IA NO. 6184/2016)

               BY ADVS.




OTHER PRESENT:

               SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR. GP, SRI.RAJU JOSEPH FOR
               ADDL.R5, SMT.REKHA VASUDEVAN FOR ADDL.R7




       THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   23.02.2024,          THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10088 OF 2013            3


                     P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                  ---------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C.) No. 10088 of 2013
                   --------------------------------------
            Dated this the 23rd day of February, 2024

                              JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the

following reliefs:

a. "Call for the records leading to Exhibit P10 and set aside the same to the extent it relates to the Schools devolved on petitioners i.e., AUP School and AMUP School) by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction:

b. declare that petitioners are entitled to function as Managers of the Schools AUPS Vaikathur and AMUP School, Vengad on the basis of Ext P8 series and Ext P9 series and c. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction commanding the 1 st respondent to allow the petitioners to function as Managers of the Schools - AUPS Vaikathur and AMUP School, Vengad on the basis of Ext P8, P8(a), Ext P9 and P9(a) orders; d. to issue such other directions as this Hon'ble Court

may deem fit and proper" [sic]

2. It is the case of the petitioners that by virtue of

a partition deed executed, one UP School each are vested in

the petitioners, out of the 5 schools under the ownership of

their deceased father. On the death of father, all the co-

owners/legal heirs appointed their mother as Manager. On

the application submitted by the Manager for transfer of

management/ownership of the respective schools, the DPI

passed orders on 4.2.2013 according sanction and the

Education Officers issued orders approving them as

Managers w.e.f. 4.2.2012, the date of order of the DPI

granting sanction. But it is the case of the petitioners that

the Government on the basis of a petition filed by the Mother,

who was the Manager of the educational agency, issued an

order on 26-3-13, directing the DPI to pass orders on the

application for prior permission for transfer of management

and ownership of the Schools, submitted jointly by all the legal

heirs, saying that such joint application is not

considered by the DPI. It is further ordered that the mother

will continue to be the Manager of all the institutions till

orders of DPI and consequential orders of DDE are passed.

The direction is issued at a time when the DPI already

accorded sanction and the educational authorities approved

the Managership of petitioners, is the submission.

3. According to the petitioners, separate applications

were submitted by the Manager in respect of the respective

institutions. According to the petitioners, the Government

passed the order without considering the relevant facts and

without hearing the petitioners especially when the orders are

already passed approving the petitioners as Managers.

Hence, this writ petition is filed.

4. When this writ petition came up for consideration on

09.04.2013, this Court passed the following order :

"Admit. Issue urgent notice returnable in ten days to the respondents.

Having regard to the fact that the Director of Public Instruction has by Exts. P8 and PB(a) orders dated 4-2-2012 accorded sanction for transfer of management of AMUP

School, Vengad and AUP School, Vaikathur respectively in favour of the petitioners and the Assistant Educational Officer, Mankada has by Ext.P9 order dated 22-3-2012 and the Assistant Educational Officer, Kuttippuram has by Ext.P9(a) order dated 20-3-2012 approved the transfer of management of the respective schools in favour of the petitioners with effect from 4-2-2012, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to an interim order as prayed for. There will accordingly be an interim order staying the operation and implementation of Ext. P10 Government order in so far as it relates to the schools covered by Exts. P8, P8(a), P9 and P9(a) orders. Needless to say, the petitioners will be entitled to continue to function as Managers of the respective schools."

5. The short point raised by the learned counsel for the

petitioners is that Ext.P10 order is passed without hearing the

petitioners. A perusal of Ext.P10 would not show that it is an

order passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioners. In such circumstances, I am of the considered

opinion that the Government should reconsider the matter,

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and

other affected parties.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions :

1) Ext.P10 is set aside.

2) The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider the matter

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners,

respondent Nos. 5 to 8 and other affected parties, if any

as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four

months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this

judgment.