IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 2ND APRIL 2009 / 12TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 10847 of 2009(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THE MNANAGER, AMALAMBIKA CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, ST.PETERS L.P.SCHOOL, VADUTHALA, KOCH-682 023. BY MR.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADVS. MR.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, MR.BIJIMON C.CHERIAN, MR.DIJO SEBASTIAN, MR.SABU JOSE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR.A.J. VARGHESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.Ravindran, J. ================== W.P.(C) No.10847 of 2009 ===================== Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2009. JUDGMENT Heard Sri. Abraham Vakkanal, the leared counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. A.J.Varghese, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. Shorn off of details, what the petitioner seeks in this Writ Petition is a direction to the Government to consider Ext.P14 representation seeking special dispensation in the matter of upgradation of the petitioner's existing lower primary school into an upper primary school. The petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the State of Kerala to pass orders on Ext.P14 representation and also to declare that the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P14 is liable to be considered in relaxation of the rules. 3. The Apex Court has in State of Kerala v. Prasad - 2007 (3) KLT 531 held that applications to open new schools or to upgrade existing schools can be made only after the final list of areas where new schools are to be opened or existing schools are to be upgraded is published by the Director of Public Instruction and the Directorate invites applications as provided under Rules 2 and 2A of Chapter V of the Kerala Education Rules. The Apex Court has also held that applications made otherwise WP(C) 10847/09 -: 2 :- cannot be entertained. 4. What the petitioner seeks is evidently favourable orders at the hands of the Government and in that process to bypass the Director of Public Instruction who has been recognised by the Apex Court as the competent authority to finalise the localities where new schools are to be opened or existing schools are to be upgraded. In my opinion, the claim made by the petitioner cannot therefore be entertained. The petitioner will have to wait till the Director of Public Instruction issues a notification inviting applications for upgradation of existing schools or for opening of new schools after the findl list of areas where existing schools are to be upgraded or new schools are to be opened is published. I am therefore of the considered opinion that the reliefs prayed for in this Writ Petition cannot be granted. The Writ Petition fails and is accordingly dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to apply for upgradation of the petitioner's school if the locality where the school is situated is included in the list of areas where existing schools are to be upgraded, published by the Director of Public Instruction. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess