IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH APRIL 2011 / 16TH CHAITHRA 1933 WP(C).No. 36905 of 2004(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.K.IYPE, S/O.KURIAN KOCHU KURIAN, VARAMBINAKATHU HOUSE, NIRANAM WEST, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. C.A.CHACKO, S/O.C.C.ABRAHAM, CHETHENKERIL HOUSE, ROSE MOUNT, STADIUM ROAD, THIRUVALLA-1. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVALLA. 3. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SMT.DEEPA G. PAL FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R2 TO 5 SHRI T.T. MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF RPOCEEDINGS DATED 4.2.1974 EXT.P2-TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 15.11.1999 EXT.P3-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP 12207/2002 DT.23.7.2002 EXT.P4-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OS 161/1995 DT.30.10.2002 EXT.P5-TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF R2 DATED 21.8.2003 EXT.P6-TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF R3 DATD 1.12.2003 EXT.P7-TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DT.18.12.2003 IN WPC 40064/2003 EXT.P8-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DT.16.6.2004 IN WPC 40064/2003 EXT.P9-TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF R4 DATED 6.12.2004 RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R1(A)-TRUE COPY F UDAMBADY NO.115/1093 ME EXT.R1(B)-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN OP NO.24285/2002 EXT.R1(C)-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 36035/2004 // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.36905 of 2004-R - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of April, 2011. JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P9 order passed by the Government. The matter in dispute is one concerning the management of a school. 2. The petitioner claims that he is a member of the Committee formed for the administration of the St. Thomas High School, Kadapra, in Pathanamthitta District. The bare facts for the disposal of the writ petition are the following: 3. The administration of the school was vested with a Committee consisting of 16 persons by virtue of Udampady No.115/1093 M.E. According to the petitioner, a modified constitution for the management of the school was drafted and was approved by the Regional Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Thiruvananthapuram, as per Ext.P1. 4. The father of the first respondent was the Manager of the school for a long time and one Shri T.K. Varghese was appointed as Manager on 16.10.1993 which was approved by the second respondent as per order dated 5.11.1994. wpc 36905/2004 2 5. Alleging that the appointment of Shri T.K. Varghese was not in terms of the 1994 constitution, the petitioner along with certain others, filed O.S. No.161/1995 before the Munsiff's Court, Thiruvalla seeking various reliefs. They also challenged the approval of appointment granted to Shri T.K. Varghese. The appeal was allowed as per Ext.P2 order by the third respondent. This was under challenge before this Court in O.P. No.32190/1999, wherein an interim order was passed and accordingly Shri T.K. Varghese continued as the Manager till 9.10.2000. Thereafter, the first respondent was appointed as Manager. His appointment was not approved initially, which was challenged in O.P. No.12207/2002. Therein, this Court directed O.S. No.161/1995 to be disposed of within a time frame and status quo to be maintained till the disposal of the suit. The civil suit was dismissed as per Ext.P4 judgment. In Ext.P9 order, the Government relied upon the contents of the judgment of the civil court and accordingly repelled the challenge against the approval of the first respondent. 6. Heard parties. 7. Learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that the judgment in the civil suit has become final and no appeal was filed by the petitioner or anybody else. It is submitted that the said judgment is binding on the parties and Ext.P9 does not call for any interference. wpc 36905/2004 3 8. In Ext.P9 order passed by the Government, great reliance was placed on the findings in the judgment. Even before the Government, the parties have been relying upon the findings in the judgment. The Government found that the legality of the reconstituted Committee of 1974 has been elaborately discussed in the judgment and the court has also raised serious suspicion over the conduct of the authority who approved the 1974 reconstitution. It was held that the reconstituted body of 1974 is not a legally valid one. The committee constituted as per the deed executed and registered as Udampady No.115/1093 ME by 15 members is the only legally valid constituted body. Therefore, only the members of that body is empowered to appoint a manager for the school. 9. Evidently, the judgment of the civil court has become final. Therefore, the said findings will bind the respective parties. The petitioner was also a plaintiff in the suit. The Government has only acted in terms of the findings by the civil court. In that view of the matter, the challenge against Ext.P9 fails and the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/