Kerala High Court

Arimbra Subair vs Narakkadan Hamza Haji on 6 May, 2025

                                   1
WA NO. 983 OF 2025




                                                        2025:KER:33599
              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

                                   &

               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

         TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 16TH VAISAKHA, 1947


                          W.A. NO. 983 OF 2025

         (AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.14093 OF 2025
                       OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA)

APPELLANT/8TH RESPONDENT

             ARIMBRA SUBAIR,
             (WRONGLY SHOWN AS CYBER IN THE WRIT PETITION
             PRESIDENT, TIRURANGADI SPORTS ACADEMY, TIRURANGADI,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306


             BY ADVS.
             K.ANAND
             GOWRI MENON
             NANDHANA T.B.
             ARCHANA N.



RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7:

     1       NARAKKADAN HAMZA HAJI, AGED 70 YEARS,
             S/O MUHAMMED, RESIDING AT NARAKKADAN HOUSE,
             PALLIPARAMBA, EAST BAZAR, TIRURANGADI P O,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306

     2       THE STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
                                   2
WA NO. 983 OF 2025




                                                       2025:KER:33599
            DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM P O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
            DISTRICT, PIN - 695 001

     3      THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION,
            OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION,
            DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695 014

     4      THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
            MALAPPURAM P O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
            PINCODE, PIN - 676 505

     5      THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
            TIRURANGADI P O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306

     6      THE PRINCIPAL,
            TIRURANGADI GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
            TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306

     7      THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            OFFICE OF THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
            TIRURANGADI POLICE STATION,
            MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306

     8      THE TIRURANGADI MUNICIPALITY,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TIRURANGADI P O,
            TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 306


OTHER PRESENT:

            GP SRI. BEJOY CHANDRAN, SC SRI. SUJAY SATHYAN

    THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.05.2025, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                     3
WA NO. 983 OF 2025




                                                              2025:KER:33599
                           JUDGMENT

(Dated: 6th May, 2025)

GOPINATH P.,

This Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order

dated 02.05.2025 in I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.14093 of

2025, whereby the learned single Judge rejected the prayer for

vacating the interim order dated 4.4.2025 in W.P.(C) No.14093

of 2025.

2. The Learned Judge, taking into consideration Ext.P9

communication issued by the Deputy Director of Education,

Malappuram, to the Director of General Education,

Thiruvananthapuram, requesting that the permission granted

by Ext.P8 to use the ground attached to the Thirurangadi,

Government Higher Secondary School, for the conduct of a foot

ball tournament by the appellant and also taking into account

the law laid down by this court in SNDP Yogam Sakha

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 No.982 v. State of Kerala (2024 KHC online 262) took

the view that the application for vacating the said interim order

should be rejected. The learned single Judge also observed that

it is not clear from a reading of Ext.P8, as to in what manner the

conduct of the tournament is beneficial to the students of the

school. It is also clear from a reading of the impugned order that

the learned single Judge took note of the fact that the affidavit

filed by the Deputy Director of Education, Malappuram, before

this court was contradictory to the stand taken by her in Ext.P9

communication issued to the Director of General Education.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that a

similar tournament was conducted last year also and the

organisers had given substantial amounts to the Parent Teacher

Association (for short 'PTA') for the development of the school.

It is submitted that nearly Rs.11 lakhs were given to the PTA,

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 after the conduct of the tournament last year, and this year also,

the organisers have agreed to make a substantial payment for

constructing classrooms in the school. It is submitted that the

permission granted to the appellant is strictly in conformity

with the provisions of Rules 15 and 16 of Chapter IV of the

Kerala Education Rules, which indicate that the properties of

Government or Aided Schools can be utilised for the purposes

indicated, subject to conditions. It is submitted that the

judgment of this court in SNDP Yogam Sakha No.982

(supra) relates to the holding of religious functions. It is

submitted that the writ petitioner has filed the writ petition

stating that he is the president of the PTA. It is submitted that

the writ petitioner (1st respondent herein) is not the president

of the PTA and has never been, and he now claims that he is the

president of a Poura Samity. It is also submitted that the PTA

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 (additional 9th respondent in the writ petition) has no objection

as the tournament is being conducted only during the summer

recess.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant also refers to the

affidavit dated 21.04.2025 filed by the Deputy Director of

Education, Malappuram, in support of his contention that the

use of the school ground is not in violation of the Rules.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the Thirurangadi

Municipality, the PTA, and the learned Government Pleader

also support the contentions of the learned counsel for the

appellant and submit that the use of the ground to conduct the

tournament is not in violation of the Rules, and if the benefit to

the school is ensured, there is nothing wrong in such permission

being granted.

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599

6. Learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner (1st

respondent) submits that the impugned order is perfectly legal

and sustainable, and no interference is called for at the hands of

the Division Bench. It is submitted that none of the

communications which are on record in this case, either from

the appellant or from the educational authorities, indicate the

benefit that may be received by the school from the permission

being granted to use the school ground for the conduct of the

football tournament. It is submitted that the provisions of Rules

15 and 16 indicate that when school premises are permitted to

be used for such purposes, it is necessary that rent be collected

at prevailing rates. It is submitted that the organisers are also

to undertake that they will make good any damage that is caused

to the properties of the school. It is submitted that none of the

conditions are satisfied in the permission granted to the

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 appellant to conduct the football tournament. It is also

submitted that Ext.P1 circular indicates that no such permission

can be granted. It is also pointed out that Ext.P1 proceeds on

the basis of the directions issued by this court in the judgment

in Gopalkrishnan v. Secretary, Corporation of Kollam

(2002 KHC 467).

7. It is submitted at the bar that an impleading petition

has been filed by a parent of a student of the school. It is

submitted that yet another writ petition has been filed

challenging the decision taken by the educational authorities to

permit the use of a school ground. It is submitted that the

permission granted for the use of the school ground is not for

the benefit of the school or the students, and therefore, this

Court may not interfere with the impugned interim order.

8. Learned Government Pleader submits that the rent as

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 contemplated by the provisions of Rule 16 will be fixed and

collected from the organisers, and a suitable undertaking that

any damage caused to the school premises will be made good by

the organisers will also be taken. It is also submitted that a

Division bench of this Court had considered an identical issue

in State of Kerala and Others v. Abdul Sathar P. and

Another (2004 KHC 1051) and the view taken by this Court

in the said judgment shows that the impugned order cannot be

sustained.

9. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

appellant, learned Government Pleader appearing for the

official respondents, learned counsel appearing for the 1st

respondent (writ petitioner), the learned counsel appearing for

the Thirurangadi Municipality, and the learned counsel

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 appearing for the additional 9th respondent we are of the view

that the appellant is entitled to relief. We have also heard the

submissions of the learned counsel who states that he has filed

an impleading petition on behalf of a parent of a student of the

school, though such an application is not yet on record.

10. Learned single Judge refused to vacate the interim

order initially granted in W.P.(C) No.14093 of 2025 essentially

on the ground that the Deputy Director of Education,

Malappuram, had filed an affidavit contradicting the stand

taken by her in Ext.P9 communication and also considering the

law laid down by this Court in SNDP Yogam Sakha No.982

(supra). We find on a reading of the judgment of this court in

SNDP Yogam Sakha No.982 (supra), that the said decision

was in relation to the permission sought/given to conduct a

religious function on the premises of a school. A government

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 school is a secular institution, and religious functions cannot be

conducted on the premises of a Government school. The rules

also do not permit the conduct of such functions on school

premises. However, the conduct of a football tournament

cannot be said to be in violation of Rules 15 and 16 of Chapter 4

of the Kerala Education Rules, as the Rules specifically

contemplate that permission can be granted for the conduct of

such functions, subject to conditions. However, the learned

counsel appearing for the 1st respondent (writ petitioner) is

right in contending that the benefit that the school may obtain

from the conduct of the festival must be clearly specified.

11. A Division Bench of this Court considered an identical

question in Abdul Sathar P. (supra). It was held:-

"20. In the above circumstances, we proceed to consider the prayer of the first respondent for direction to the appellants to grant permission to conduct the football tournament in the playground und of the G.M.U.P. School, Cherur. The claim of

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 the first respondent that the open space between the buildings of the school was developed as a play-ground by the Diamond Arts and Sports Club, Cherur was not disputed by the appellants or the second respondent. The averments in Para. 1 and 2 of the writ petition regarding the services rendered by the Club to the school have not been controverted by the appellants. It is also not disputed that three All India Sevens Football Tournaments had been organised by the first respondent in the playground of the school during the previous years with the permission of the authorities of the school. Out of the profit from the Third All India Sevens Football Tournament organised in 2002, the first respondent has offered to contribute a sum of Rs. 1,05,000/- (Rupees One Lakh and Five Thousand only) to the school for the construction of a new stage cum class room. The first respondent has also offered to contribute to the school 60% of the profit from the proposed football tournament. The first respondent has offered to deposit an advance amount of Rs. 50,000/-which need not be refunded even if sufficient profits are not received from the tournament. Thus, if permission is granted to conduct the football tournament, the school will get at least a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/-which can be used for the development of educational facilities in the school. As we have already noted, the proposed football tournament will be during a maximum period of four weeks. The conduct of the tournament after 6.30 p.m. will not in any way affect the normal functioning of the school or the education of the students. The construction of the proposed building with the financial help of the second respondent District Panchayat will not be prevented due to the conduct of the football

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 tournament since the said building is to be constructed only outside the area used as play-ground. The Half Yearly Examination will be over by 20-1-2004 and the Annual Examination is to be conducted only in April 2004. The football matches will not be conducted before 6.30 p.m. and therefore either the regular classes or the special classes, if any, will not be affected. The Kannamangalam Grama Panchayat and the Parent Teacher Association of the School have no objection to the conduct of the tournament. On the contrary, they are in favour of it. We are also of the view that the football tournament can develop among the students sportsman spirit and interest in games. We find that grant of permission to the first respondent to conduct the tournament will be to the advantage of the school and the benefit of the students. We do not see any valid reason to deny permission.

21. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellants and the learned counsel for the second respondent strongly opposed the grant of permission to conduct the football tournament on the ground that there is likelihood of law and order problem if the tournament is conducted. They invited our attention to the averments in the Memorandum of Writ Appeal, the affidavit filed on behalf of the 4th appellant and the affidavit of the second respondent. Moreover, registration of any case against any individual by the police cannot stand in the way of conducting a football tournament in the village. From the materials placed before the Court it is clear that if at all any tension prevailed in the area, it was in connection with the election of the President of the Kannamangalam Grama Panchayat and not in connection with the proposed football tournament. The Circle

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 Inspector of Police, Malappuram apprehends trouble because, according to him, the football tournament is being organized by one of the parties in the cases registered in connection with the election of the President of the Gram Panchayat. But the fact remains that the tournament is organised by the Club. From the materials placed before the Court, it would appear that since a particular gentleman was removed from the post of the President of the Kannamangalam Gram Panchayat, he and his supporters do not want the football tournament to be organised by the Club. The reason for the objection appears to be that the persons actively involved in the organising of the football tournament are not his supporters. Being the local leader of a political party in power, the said gentleman is allegedly using his political influence over the authorities to prevent the conduct of the football tournament. Even if some persons threaten to prevent or disrupt any function or event in a locality, the law enforcing agencies cannot throw up their hands in helplessness and say that the function or event should not be organised on account of such threats. It is the duty of the District Administration and the law enforcing agencies to uphold the rule of law and to enable the conduct of lawful functions and events. Otherwise the persons in power can always prevent the conduct of any event or function by getting some peo-ple to send some petitions threatening to create law and order problems. In this case, we are satisfied that the bogie of law and order problem has been raised by the appellants and the second respondent only as a ruse to prevent the holding of the football tournament as it is not to the liking of some politically influential persons. It is

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 significant that all these apprehensions about law and order problem and the petitions against the conduct of the tournament surfaced only after the impugned judgment was delivered by the learned single Judge. There is force in the allegation of the counsel for the first respondent that the petitions against the holding of the football tourmament were deliberately engineered as part of the organised sinister attempt to prevent the conduct of the tournament. In the above circumstances, we are not inclined to refuse permission to the first respondent to conduct the football tournament on the alleged ground that law and order problems are apprehended. We are not satisfied about the bona fides of the appellants in this regard. Even if any such law and order problem is likely to arise during the football tournament, the law enforcing agencies should be prepared and capable of dealing with the situation so as to maintain law and order and to prevent any breach of peace.

22. Hence the writ appeal is disposed of as hereunder:-

(a) The appellants are directed to permit the first respondent to organise and conduct the All India Sevens Foot Ball Tournament in the playground of the G M. U. P. School, Cherur between 20-1-2004 and 1-3-2004.

(b) The tournament shall not be conducted before 6.30 p. m.

(c) The organisers shall ensure that no damage is caused to the buildings and other properties of the school.

(d) After the tournament, the playground shall be restored to its original position by the first respondent.

(e) The first respondent shall deposit with the third appellant - Headmaster, a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- before the

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 start of the tournament. The said amount can be utilised by the third appellant in accordance with law for the construction of the stage cum class-room as proposed by the Parent Teacher Association or for other educational purposes of the school.

(f) On completion of the tournament, the first respondent shall contribute 60% of the profit to the school as promised.

(g) If the teachers and the students of the school request, they shall be given free passes to watch the tournament.

(h) The District Collector, Malappuram and the Superintendent of Police, Malappuram are directed to take all necessary steps to maintain law and order and to effectively prevent breach of peace and commission of offences during or in connection with the football tournament.

(i) This order granting permission to the first respondent to conduct the football tournament in the playground of the G. M. U. P. School, Cherur shall not be treated as a precedent and any request for permission in future can be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law and in the light of the prevailing circumstances.

(j) The impugned judgment will stand modified to the above extent.

(k) The Registry is directed to immediately send a copy of this judgment to the District Collector and the Superintendent of Police for information and compliance.

Order accordingly.

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599

Our reading of Rules 15 and 16 of Chapter IV of the KER also

indicates that the view taken by the Division Bench in Abdul

Sathar P. (supra) is fully in consonance with the statutory

provisions. We are thus in respectful agreement with the view

taken in Abdul Sathar P. (supra). We may also profitably

extract paragraph 3 of the affidavit dated 21.04.2025 filed by the

Deputy Director of Education, Malappuram, which reads thus:-

"3. It is respectfully submitted that before taking a final decision on the application of the 8th respondent, the Deputy Director of Education had conducted a site inspection on the land on 16.04.2025 and obtained opinion and statement directly from Mrs. Mini K.K., Headmistress and Mr. Abdul Gafoor Principal-in-charge of the School. Besides the authority conducted physical inspection on the land where the tournament is proposed to be conducted In fact, the school and playground are physically separated by a tarred public road and both areas are enclosed with boundary walls. Moreover, the

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 proposed tournament is scheduled to be held during the summer vacation and therefore, the tournament will not affect the daily affairs of the school and students."

It is thus clear that the conduct of the tournament will not

prejudice the students in any manner, and in fact, a substantial

advantage will also accrue to a government school by permitting

the conduct of the tournament.

12. The judgment in Gopalkrishnan v. Secretary,

Corporation of Kollam (2002 KHC 467), on the basis of

which Ext.P.1 was issued, relates to the placement of

advertisement boards on school premises that may influence

the minds of school-going students. The law laid down therein

has no application to the facts of this case.

For all the above reasons, we allow this writ appeal by

setting aside the impugned interim order dated 02.05.2025 in

I.A.No.1 of 2025 in W.P.(C) No.14093 of 2025, and vacating the

WA NO. 983 OF 2025

2025:KER:33599 interim order dated 4.4.2025 in W.P.(C) No.14093 of 2025.

While doing so, we also feel it appropriate to issue the following

directions:

i. The Deputy Director of Education, Malappuram, will

forthwith issue an order indicating the terms upon

which the appellant is permitted to use the school

ground. The said order must clearly specify the

benefit that will be accrued to the school through the

PTA or otherwise from the conduct of the

tournament;