IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN FRIDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2010 / 28TH PHALGUNA 1931 WA.No. 81 of 2010() ------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.5102/2009 Dated 27/03/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): 8TH RESPONDENT: ----------------------- TRESSIAMMA.M.J., HEADMISTRESS-IN-CHARGE, LITTLE FLOWER HIGH SCHOOL, NARAKKAL. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 7: ------------------------- 1. THE VICAR, THE CORPORATE MANAGER, ST.MARY'S CHURCH EDUCATIOAL AGENCY, NJARAKKAL-682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. JOSE KACHAPPALLY, PRESIDENT, PARENTS TEACHERS ASSOCIATION LITTLE FLOWER HIGH SCHOOL, NJARAKKAL-682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 6. SR.JESSY, THE MOTHER SUPERIOR LITTLE FLOWER CONVENT, NJARAKKAL-682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. SR.VINCENT MARY, PROVINCIAL SUPERIOR, VIMALA PROVINCE CARMALITE PROVINCIAL HOUSE, KOVIL VATTOM ROAD, ERNAKULAM-35. W.A.No.81 of 2010 : 2 : 8. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, ERNAKULAM SOUTH. 9. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, NJARAKKAL-682 505, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.B.HOOD FOR R3, 5, 8 AND 9 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED FOR R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.E.HAMZA FOR R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, FOR R6 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.R.RAMAN, J. ------------------------------- W.A.No.81 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge at the interim stage of the proceedings, by which the learned Single Judge has directed that the post of Headmaster shall not be filled up on a regular basis until further orders and that the senior most High School Assistant shall be given charge as Headmaster. The senior most High School Assistant was subsequently impleaded in the writ petition, who has filed the present writ appeal. 2. We have heard the learned counsel, Sri.Pirappancode V.S. Sudheer, appearing for the appellant, Sri.V.A.Muhammed, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, Sri.S.Sreekumar, the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent, as also the Government Pleader. W.A.No.81 of 2010 2 3. The dispute is regarding the ownership as also the appointment of the Manager in the school. The prayer made in the writ petition is for a direction to dispose of Ext.P6 representation as also not to transfer the properties. There were connected writ petitions. According to the appellant, the interim order passed does not subserve the main relief sought for in the writ petition. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would contend that the appointment of the third respondent as the Manager of the school is only because the Government passed the order deciding the ownership of the school which is a civil dispute to be decided by the civil court and hence the Government has got no jurisdiction. Further, the present arrangement is only a temporary arrangement and the appellant has been put in charge of the post of Headmaster. W.A.No.81 of 2010 3 5. A copy of WA.No.807/2009, challenging a similar contention, though not identical, raised against the interim order passed, is produced before us, and we have perused the same. Having regard to the fact the present interim order prohibits the appointment of Headmaster, though ultimately the relief may not have any relevance in the matter of appointment of a teacher, but as to who could exercise the power of appointment as Manager is an issue relevant for consideration. 6. Having heard all the parties, we find, at this stage, the contesting respondent who is recognised as the Manager of the School cannot altogether be prevented from making the appointment of the headmaster of the school. Hence the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge requires modification. Accordingly, we direct that the appointment and approval, if any, made to the post of Headmaster will be provisional and subject to the result of the final outcome of the W.A.No.81 of 2010 4 writ petition. However, this interim arrangement will not, in any way, advance the case of the respondent and will not prejudice the contentions raised in the writ petitions. List the connected writ petitions before the appropriate Bench for hearing. The writ appeal is disposed of as above. J.CHELAMESWAR, Chief Justice P.R.RAMAN, Judge nj.