IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 697 of 2011 -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19481/2009 DATED 11.3.2011 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER:- ------------------------ C.SASIDHARAN NAIR,MANAGER, SREE SETHU PARVATHI BHAI HIGH SCHOOL, KADAKKAVOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. GOVT.OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVT., EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K. SHERIN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA.No. 697 of 2011() APPENDIX APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.3.2011 IN W.P(C) NO.19481/2009N ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE PACHAYAT ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY OF THE DETAILS OF the PLUS ONE SEATS AND DETAILS OF THE STUDENTS STUDYING IN SSLC CLASSES ANNEXURE A4: TRUE COPY OF THE RESOLUTION WITH COVERING LETTER DATED 10.9.2007 RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S TO JUDGE jma C.N.Ramachandran Nair & K.Vinod Chandran, JJ. --------------------------------------- W.A.No.697 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this, the 14th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT C.N.Ramachandran Nair,J.: The appeal is filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge, dismissing appellant's claim for upgrading his school as a Higher Secondary School under the education policy, in which Tsunami affected areas have some priority. 2. We have heard counsel for the appellant, learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents and also gone through the judgment of the learned Single Judge. 3. On going through Exhibit P5 scheme, what we notice is that under clauses 2(b) and (c), upgradation of High Schools to Higher Secondary Schools is provided only in Palakkad, Malappuram and Kozhikode districts and not in the district where the appellant's school is situate. The request was obviously for upgradation of the school in 2008-2009 when the writ petition was filed. It is not known whether the W.A.No.697 of 2011 - 2 - Government's decision to upgrade High Schools to Higher Secondary Schools only in northern districts still continues to be in force. We do not think, there is any significance for the location of the school for the purpose of considering upgradation. So far as the aided schools are concerned, where the salaries of staff – both teaching and non-teaching – are paid by the Government, Government should be certainly careful about upgradation as it leads to increase in staff strength, both teaching and non-teaching, and so much so, unless there is justification for upgradation, no school should be upgraded. What would weigh with the Government is, the educational needs of the students in the area. If there are sufficient Higher Secondary Schools in and around the appellant's school, there is certainly no case for upgradation of appellant's school. Appellant's counsel submitted that the appellant has nine divisions in Standard-X itself and so much so, there is need to upgrade the appellant's school. If the appellant has nine divisions in Standard-X, then it is certainly a school with large number of eligible students seeking higher studies. W.A.No.697 of 2011 - 3 - 4. The learned Government Pleader, with reference to the statement filed, submitted that as many as nine Higher Secondary Schools are functioning within 7 Kms. range of appellant's school. The total number of seats available in these Higher Secondary Schools is 1480, whereas the total number of students passing out S.S.L.C. in the area is 1253. If the figures submitted by the Government are correct, then certainly there is no justification for any more Higher Secondary School under aided sector in the area. The Manager of the aided school only is pressing for Higher Secondary School to meet the educational needs. The Parent Teacher Association, however, has not come forward with any request for upgrading appellant's school to meet the needs of the local students. 5. The appellant's counsel raised a contention that schools have to be granted with reference to the boundary of the Panchayat. We do not find any significance for the territory of a Panchayat for the purpose of providing educational facilities for students. There is nothing to indicate that a student from one Panchayat should study in the schools located in the same W.A.No.697 of 2011 - 4 - Panchayat. What is relevant is, only the distance from the place of residence of the students to the school. In other words, if schools are available in 5-6 Kms. radius, there is no need for starting new schools for the reason that Higher Secondary Schools are not there in the same Panchayat. We do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. C.N.Ramachandran Nair Judge K.Vinod Chandran Judge. vku/-