IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 30315 of 2010(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KADEEJA BEEGUM, T.C.35/372, V.G.157, VALLAKADAVU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN SMT.M.A.ZOHRA SRI.R.S.MADHU SRI.MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO HON'BLE MINISTER, EDUCATION AND CULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD 678 001. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD 678 001. 5. SMT.SUHARABI, W/O.U.AHAMED KABEER, ALATHUR POST OFFICE ROAD, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD 678 541. ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN FOR R-5 SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH FOR R-5 SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR FOR R-5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30315 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The case of the petitioner is that she is the Manager of A.S.M.M.H.S. School and A.S.M.M.T. Teachers Training Institute. The aforesaid institutions belonged to A.S.Muhammed Kutty Sahib, as per the court auction sale in O.S.No.56 of 1947, Sub Court, Palakkad and purchased by him in the court auction sale. Muhammed Kutty Sahib registered Alathur Educational Society in 1956. Muhammed Kutty Sahib expired in 1959. It is stated that he had three wives and ten children. At that time, all the children of Muhammed Kutty Sahib, except the eldest daughter (fifth respondent) were minors. The husband of the fifth respondent, was the Manager of the school from 1960 to 1980. It is also stated that in 1980, all the children attained majority and they were made members of the managing committee. It is stated that the eldest son of the founder, W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 2 M.Ahamed Kabeer, was selected as the Manager. He continued as Manager till his death in 2008. 2. Disputes arose among the members constituting the educational agency. The fifth respondent stated that the petitioner has not disclosed the true and correct facts in the Writ Petition. In the counter affidavit filed by the fifth respondent, it is stated that after the death of Ahamed Kabeer in 2008, the petitioner colluded with other members of the family and declared her as the Manager of the institutions. The fifth respondent objected before the District Educational Officer in the matter of granting approval to the petitioner as the Manager. The District Educational Officer rejected the contention of the fifth respondent. The fifth respondent filed a Writ Petition challenging the approval granted to the petitioner. The Writ Petition was disposed of directing the District Educational Officer to forward the objection of the fifth respondent to the Director of Public Instruction and to treat it as an appeal. The Director of Public Instruction heard the matter and set aside the order passed by the District Educational Officer, as per Exhibit W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 3 P3 order dated 24.6.2010. The petitioner filed Exhibit P4 revision before the first respondent, challenging Exhibit P3 order. 3. As per Exhibit P3 order passed by the Director of Public Instruction, the approval granted to the petitioner as Manager, as per the order dated 25.6.2009, was cancelled. It was also held that till the Manager is elected as per the bye-laws of the educational agency, the duties of the Manager would be entrusted to the District Educational Officer, Palakkad for the limited purpose of discharging routine functions. As stated earlier, Exhibit P4 order is pending in revision before the first respondent. 4. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition is to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the first respondent to dispose of Exhibit P4 revision at the earliest and to issue an order restraining the District Educational Officer from implementing Exhibit P3 order till the disposal of the revision. W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 4 5. On 15.10.2009, the following interim order was passed : “The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent opposed the stay. It is submitted that continuance of the petitioner as Manager would be detrimental to the interests of the institution. The counsel for the fifth respondent pointed out that the idea of the petitioner is to receive a huge amount of Rs.40 lakhs granted by the Central Government and also to make appointments indiscriminately. The counsel for the fifth respondent also prayed for a short time of one week to file a counter affidavit. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim stay granted on 4.10.2010 is modified as follows : The stay will continue for a period of one month from 4.10.2010 subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not make any appointment of teachers or non teaching staff and also on condition that the petitioner shall not receive any grant either from the Central Government or from the State Government until further orders.” W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 5 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent that the revision was heard by the first respondent on 9.11.2010 and orders were reserved. 7. In view of the subsequent developments, it is not necessary to consider the contentions put forward by the parties. The Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to dispose of Exhibit P4 revision within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Till the revision is disposed of, the interim order dated 15.10.2010 shall be in force. The petitioner shall produce the certified copy of the judgment before the first respondent. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 6 K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30315 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2010 ORDER The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent opposed the stay. It is submitted that continuance of the petitioner as Manager would be detrimental to the interests of the institution. The counsel for the fifth respondent pointed out that the idea of the petitioner is to receive a huge amount of Rs.40 lakhs granted by the Central Government and also to make appointments indiscriminately. The counsel for the fifth respondent also prayed for a short time of one week to file a counter affidavit. W.P.(C) No.30315/2010 7 In the facts and circumstances of the case, the interim stay granted on 4.10.2010 is modified as follows : The stay will continue for a period of one month from 4.10.2010 subject to the condition that the petitioner shall not make any appointment of teachers or non teaching staff and also on condition that the petitioner shall not receive any grant either from the Central Government or from the State Government until further orders. Post on 26.10.2010. Hand over copy to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl