IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 23406 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ KAMMUKUTTY MOULAVI, MANAGER, CHMKM U.P.SCHOOL, KUNDOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER (PWD) BUILDING SECTION, PARAPPANANGADI, MALAPPURAM. 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MALAPPURAM. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.T.B.REMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.23406/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1785 OF 1998 DT 23.9.1999. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE GO.RT.NO.484/2000/G.EDN DT 3.2.2000. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT 28.5.2008. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF the PROFORMA, RENT FIXATION STATEMENT SKETCH AND THE FITNESS CERTIFICATE. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ============== W.P.(C) NO. 23406 OF 2008 (J) ==================== Dated this the 16th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the Manager of C.H.Muhammed Koya Memorial U.P.School, Kundoor, Malappuram. The school was taken over from 25/8/1995 and the 2nd respondent was appointed as the Ex-Officio Manager. The take over of the school was challenged before this Court resulting in Ext.P1 judgment in WA No.1785/98. It was ordered that it will be open to the petitioner to move an application before the Government under Section 14(3) of the Act and the Government was directed to consider the same. 2. Accordingly, the matter was taken up with the Government and the Government passed Ext.P2 order, returning the school to the petitioner w.e.f. 01/04/2000. The claim in this writ petition is for payment of rent during the period till 01/04/2000, when the school was returned. Petitioner refers to Rule 3 of Chapter XX KER and submits that it is the duty of the 2nd respondent to have fixed a rent within the time specified therein. It is stated that Exts.P3 and P4 are the applications made with all necessary documents, but however, the 2nd respondent has not fixed the rent so far. 3. Learned Government Pleader on instruction submits that the Assistant Executive Engineer has fixed the rent @ Rs.6,153 per month for the period from 30/11/95 to 31/3/2000 and had forwarded the same to the Assistant WPC 23406/08 :2 : Educational Officer, who in turn has submitted the same to the 2nd respondent. It is also stated that the 2nd respondent is awaiting certain clarifications, which he has sought from the 1st respondent. It is submitted that once the clarification is received, necessary orders finalising the claim will be passed. 4. The Rule that is relevant in the matter of fixation of rent is Rule 3 of Chapter XX KER. In terms of the said Rule, the primary responsibility for fixation of rent is that of the 2nd respondent. Now that the Assistant Executive Engineer has fixed the rent and the AEO has forwarded the same to the 2nd respondent, it is the duty of the 2nd respondent to finalise the same and settle the claim. If he thought it necessary to obtain clarification from the 1st respondent, it is up to him to expedite the same. Be that as it may, it is directed that at any rate the final order in relation tot he claim for rent raised by the petitioner, shall be passed by the 2nd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 6 months of production of a copy of this judgment. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp