IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 208 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A.631/2010 IN WPC.27386/2008 Dated 04/02/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ M.V.SUSHEELA, W/O.LATE BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT THAIKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, PULLIPARAMBA, CHELAMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PARAPPANANGADI. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SHRI.SUDHEER, S/O.LATE SUBRAMANIAN, THAIKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, PULLIPARAMBA, CHELAMBRA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU (R1 TO R3) ADV.SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (R4) THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.208 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 15th February, 2010. J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. This Writ Appeal is filed, challenging the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge. Without going into the merits of the case, the learned Single Judge took the view that the affairs of the school should be managed, as directed by the Government in Ext.P8 order, till the Writ Petition is finally heard. It was also ordered that such arrangement will be subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition and without prejudice to the contentions taken by both sides. Feeling aggrieved by the said direction, this Writ Appeal is preferred. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellant was functioning as the Manager of the school, though, without approval, after the death of her husband. According to her, her husband was managing the school for the last 20 years as approved Manager. Therefore, it is prayed that having regard to balance of convenience, the appellant may be permitted to continue in management. WA NO.208/2010 2 3. We notice that this is a dispute between two branches of the family of late Appukutty, who established the school. If the decision of the Government is allowed to stand, the school will be under the exclusive management of the 4th respondent, who represents one branch. We think, pending decision by the civil court or pending disposal of the Writ Petition, the appellant should also have a say in the management of the school, especially in the matter of making appointments. So, having regard to the facts of the case, it is ordered that if any appointment is made in the school, the same shall be done by the 4th respondent, only with the concurrence of the appellant. If only the 4th respondent makes the appointments with the approval of the appellant, the Educational Officer need approve them. If any appointment is pending for approval, the 4th respondent may seek the concurrence of the appellant. If the appellant does not concur with the appointment, the appointment shall be withdrawn and another person, agreed to by both sides, may be nominated. It is ordered that this order concerning management of the school will remain in force till the civil court passes an order, interim or WA NO.208/2010 3 final concerning management, or the writ petition is finally disposed of, whichever is earlier. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. tgs K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.A. No.208 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T Dated 15th February, 2010.