IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 12104 of 2007(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- E.N.CHANDRAN, AGED 47, S/O. MEENAKSHI AMMA, E.N.HOUSE, ACHAMPEEDIKA P.O., KALLIAYASERRY, KANNUR. (CHAIRMAN, MALANAD EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST, KALLIASSERY, REGISTRATION NO.208). BY ADV. SRI.P.V.MOHANAN SRI.RAMESAN NAMBEESAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, TRIVANDRUM. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR. 4. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THALIPARAMBA. 5. VALSAN MADATHIL, MADATHIL HOUSE, CHOWA P.O., KANNUR. 6. M.P.MADHUSOODHANAN, MEENPATTY, THIMIRI, P.O.VAYATTUPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.L.G.SURESH BABU FOR R1-4 ADV.SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: SU W.P.C.NO.12104/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: A COPY OF THE REGISTERED DEED DATED 9/6/1981. P2: A COPY OF THE REGISTERED GIFT DEED EXECUTED BY LAKSHMI IN FAVOUR OF MADHUSOODANAN DATED 22/8/1986. P3: A COPY OF TE GIFT DEED DATED 01/4/1992. P4: A COPY OF THE GIFT DEED DATED 6/11/1999. P5: A COPY OF THE DOCUMENT DATED 26/10/2002. P6: A COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 15/11/2002. P7: A COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF SHRI MADHUSODANAN DATED 25/3/2004. P8: A COPY OF THE WILL DATED 4/11/2004. P9: A COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.157/2003. P10: A COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 20/7/2005. P11: A COPY OF THE JOINT APPLICATION DATED 8/8/2005. P12: A COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 17/10/2005. P13: A COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 27/5/2006. P14: A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 16/12/2006. P15: A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 23/12/2006. P16: A COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DATED 27/12/2006. P17: A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 5/3/2007. P18: A COPY OF REVISION PETITION. P19: A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 15/2/2006. P20: A COPY OF THE GO(RT) NO.4213/07/G-EDN DATED 15/9/2007. P21: A COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S.NO.157/2003 DATED 8/2/2008. P22: A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.157/2003 DATED 8/2/2008. P23: A COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. /TRUE COPY/ SU P.A. TO JUDGE S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 12104 of 2007 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 10th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the Chairman of Malanadu Educational Charitable Trust. The petitioner submits that the petitioner purchased 80 cents of land and Poomangalam School building from the 6th respondent by Ext.P10 sale deed dated 20.7.2005. According to the petitioner, the petitioner, along with the Manager of Poomangalam U.P. School, filed joint application, Ext.P11, before the Director of Public Instruction on 8.8.2005 seeking approval for transfer management of the school involving the change of ownership under Rule 5A of Chapter III of KER in favour of the petitioner. After enquiry, the Director of Public Instruction, by Ext.P14 proceedings dated 16.12.2006, approved the transfer of management involving change of ownership in favour of the petitioner. The Assistant Educational Officer passed consequential orders on 23.12.1006. The 5th respondent, who claims to have purchased the school building and land appurtenant thereto and obtained power of attorney from the manager, filed appeal before the Government challenging Ext.P14 order of the DPI. The Government allowed Ext.P17 order quashing the order of the DPI and held as follows: “In the circumstances the orders passed by the Director of Public Instruction dated 16.12.2006 is set aside as it has no legal validity. Even though Smt. Indira has right over the school and it's property as per gift deed but she is now working in the same school, Appellant can be acted as correspondent Manager as per the Power of Attorney executed by the then Manager on 27.05.06 till the dispute over the property is finally settled by W.P(C) No. 12104 of 2007 -: 2 :- the Civil Court. Thus the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in W.P(C) No. 349/07 is complied with.” Subsequently, the Government passed Ext.P20 order appointing the 5th respondent as the manager of the school. Therefore, the petitioner got the writ petition amended challenging Ext.P20 order also. The petitioner challenges Exts. P17 and P20 orders on the ground that there is a dispute regarding the title to the property in question, which cannot be decided by the Government in proceedings under the Kerala Education Rules. The petitioner relies on the decisions of this Court in Abdul Rahim v. State of Kerala & Others, 1984 KLT 773, Iysha Narayanan v. State of Kerala & Others, 1985(1) ILR Kerala 348 and Dr. Philippose Mar Theophilus v. State of Kerala & Others, 1986 KLJ 1069 in support of the said contention. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs: “1. To call for the records leading to Ext.P17 and set aside the same by issuing writ of certiorari. 2. To issue writ of mandamus order or direction commanding the respondents No. 1 to 4 to permit the petitioner to function as Manager, Poomangalam AUP School. 3. To declare that the petitioner is legally appointed Manager of Poomangalam AUP school. 4. Any other appropriate order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice. 5. To grant the cost of this writ petition (civil) 6. To call for the records leading to Ext.P20 and set aside the same by issuing a writ of certiorari.” W.P(C) No. 12104 of 2007 -: 3 :- 2. The learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the 5th respondent oppose the prayers. 3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 4. In view of the judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is settled law that the Government cannot in proceedings under the Kerala Education Rules decide the question relating to title to the property as between two competing parties. What has been prohibited by those judgments has been done by the Government by passing Exts. P17 and P20 orders. Counsel for the 5th respondent submits that the 5th respondent has filed O.S.No. 243/2010 before the Munsiff's Court, Taliparamba for declaration of title. Of course, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is only aware of O.S. No. 157/2003, which has been referred to by the Government in its order, which suit has been subsequently dismissed by Ext.P21 decree. That being so, the Government ought to have relegated the parties to the remedy by way of civil suit instead of deciding the question of title by itself. In the above circumstances, Exts. P17 and P20 orders are quashed. Until the civil courts finally dispose of the suit, if any, pending before it, the petitioner shall be allowed to continue as manager of the school. The educational authority shall pass orders in respect of the management of the school only in accordance with the W.P(C) No. 12104 of 2007 -: 4 :- decision of the civil court on the question of title to the properties of the school. The writ petition is allowed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/