IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 14TH AUGUST 2008 / 23RD SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 33690 of 2007(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ V.P.SANKARAN NAIR, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.ANANTHAN NAIR, RESIDING AT "KUTTIVAYAL HOUSE" KAMUNDA VAZHATHATTIL, ALATTL, MANATHAVADI, WYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.L.KRISHNAMOORTHY SRI.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.SATHYA SHREEPRIYA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHEIF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KALPETTA, WYNAD DISTRICT. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MANANTHAVADI, WYNAD DISTRICT. 4. M.GOPALAN NAIR, KAMUNDA, P.O.VALLAD, THALAPUZHA VIA, MANATHAVADI, WYNAD DISTRICT. (*)ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT: THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (*)(ADDL.5TH RESPONDENT IS IMPLEADED SUO MOTU - VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 14.8.2008) BY ADV. SRI.KRISHNA PRASAD. S FOR R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR FOR R1,2,3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 11.5.1990 TAKEN BY ALL THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF LATE K.V.ANANTHAN NAIR EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 10.11.2007 TAKEN BY THEMEMBERS OF THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 1.10.2007 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY LAWYER NOTICE DATED 10.10.2007 SENT BY THE FOURTH RESPONDENT EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.5.2007 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NOD/3917/07 DATED 7.9.2007 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED ON 12.11.2007 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT EXT.P8 -DO- EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D7687/07 DATED 29.9.2007 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT //TRUE COPY// K.T. SANKARAN,J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.33690 of 2007 I -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of August, 2008. J U D G M E N T “Jai Hind ALP School, Vallad in Wynad is an aided school. There is dispute regarding the managership. As per Ext.P1 agreement entered into between the members constituting the Educational Agency, the fourth respondent M.Gopalan Nair was appointed as the Manager of the school. His managership was duly approved. 2. Subsequently, it would appear, there arose a dispute among the members who constituted the Educational Agency. Five persons out of the members of the Educational Agency met and executed Ext.P2 agreement. As per Ext.P2, the signatories therein decided to nominate V.P.Sankaran Nair, the writ petitioner, as the temporary Manager of the school. The fourth respondent is not a signatory to Ext.P2 agreement. Ext.P3 notice dated 1.10.2007 was sent on behalf of the petitioner and others to the fourth respondent. The fourth respondent caused to send Ext.P4 reply. 3. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation dated 28.5.2007 to the Assistant Educational Officer, Mananthavadi, requesting to forbid the Manager from taking any proceedings as a Manager till a new WP(C) No.33690/2007 2 Manager is appointed. In Ext.P5, it is stated that the fourth respondent was removed from managership and that a new Manager would be appointed soon. Ext.P7 representation dated 10.11.2007 was submitted by the petitioner and others to the District Educational Officer stating that majority of the members constituting the Educational Agency have decided to appoint the petitioner, V.P.Sankaran Nair, as the Manager. The request in Ext.P7 is to approve the appointment of Sankaran Nair as the Manager. Later, the petitioner and four others submitted Ext.P8 representation dated 12.11.2007 to the Assistant Educational Officer with copy to the Deputy Director of Education, Kalpetta, Wynad, wherein a request was made to stop all the activities of the fourth respondent in his capacity as the Manager. Exts.P5, P7 and P8 are pending disposal. 4. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:- “(1) To issue a writ of mandamus, or any other writ, or order, directing the third respondent to pass orders in Exhibit- P5, P7 and P8 applications and consequently approve the petitioner as the manager of the Jai Hind ALP School, Vallad. WP(C) No.33690/2007 3 (2) To issue a writ, order or direction to the fourth respondent not to make any appointment in Jai Hind ALP School, Vallad till orders are passed by the third respondent approving the petitioner as the Manager. (3) To issue such other order or direction in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent, it is stated that out of the ten members constituting the Educational Agency, two members are no more and at present there are only eight members. Out of the eight members, five of them have expressed their dissatisfaction in the continuance of Gopalan Nair as the Manager. It is also stated that after receipt of Ext.P5 representation, the Assistant Educational Officer has not accepted any acts of the fourth respondent, Gopalan Nair, in his capacity as the Manager. In paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit, it is stated as follows:- “7. Since the case is under the consideration of this Court the respondent No.2 has not taken a decision. The action for not filling up the vacancy, from the manager, is not satisfied to smooth functioning of the school. Since the matter is now under the consideration of this Court the 3rd respondent has not taken a decision.” WP(C) No.33690/2007 4 6. In the light of the contentions raised by the petitioner and in view of the statements made in the counter affidavit, and also in view of the dispute between the parties, as is clear from the lawyer notice and reply, it is necessary that the disputed question regarding managership shall be decided by the Director of Public Instruction. Therefore, Exts.P5, P7 and P8 shall be forwarded to the Director of Public Instruction for appropriate decision after affording an opportunity of being heard to the eight surviving members constituting the Educational Agency. The Director of Public Instruction is not a party to the Writ Petition. Therefore, the Director of Public Instruction, Thiruvananthapuram is impleaded as the additional fifth respondent suo motu. Learned Government Pleader takes notice for additional fifth respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows: (1) The Assistant Educational Officer, Mananthavadi shall forward Exts.P5, P7 and P8 representations to the Director of Public Instruction expeditiously and at any rate within a period of one month. Necessary records and a report shall also be forwarded by the Assistant Educational Officer, Mananthavadi to the Director of Public Instruction. (2) The Director of Public Instruction shall issue notice to all the members constituting the Educational Agency and shall consider and dispose of Exts.P5, P7 and P8 representations, as expeditiously as possible WP(C) No.33690/2007 5 and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the records from the Assistant Educational Officer, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and others. (3) The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition, a copy of the counter affidavit and certified copy of the judgment before the Director of Public Instruction. (4) The petitioner shall also furnish to the Director of Public Instruction the names and correct address of all the members of the Educational Agency, within a period of one month. (5) It is made clear that all the parties would be entitled to produce such other documents and materials before the Director of Public Instruction in support of their respective contentions. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. cks