IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2009 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 504 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.32534/2005 Dated 26/11/2008 .................... APPELLANT/6TH RESPONDENT: -------------- MAMBAHUL HUDA HIGH SCHOOL, REPREESNETED BY ITS MANAGER, KUZHICHINA, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM. BY SRI.T.KRISHNANUNNI, SENIOR ADVOCATE APPEARING ALONG WITH ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 & 7: --------------- 1. THE MANAGER, P.M.S.A.M. UP SCHOOL, VENGARA, KUTTOOR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 6. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, VENGARA, MALAPPURAM. 7. UMMER KAPPEN, S/O.LATE MUHAMMED, KAPPEN HOUSE, POOCHOLAMADU, CHEROOR POST, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 GOVT. PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW FOR R2 TO R6 SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR FOR R7 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------- W.A. NO.504 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated 11th March. 2009. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The appellant was the 6th respondent in the writ petition. The writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent herein, challenging Ext.P5 list published by the Director of Public Instruction under sub-rule (4) pf Rule 2 of Chapter V of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959, to the extent it includes the appellant school as Serial No.31 and also Ext.P15 order passed by the Government, by which the appellant school was restored in the list of schools to be recognized. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in State of Kerala v. Prasad [2007(3) KLT 531 (SC)], the impugned decision in favour of the appellant school is liable to be set aside. Since the point raised by the appellant is covered against it by the said decision of the Apex Court, the learned senior counsel for the appellant Sri.T.Krishnanunni, submitted that since recognition was granted to a large number of schools, including the appellant school, the writ petition is not maintainable as against the appellant alone. In view of the judgment under appeal, the grant in favour of the appellant alone stands set aside and the grant in favour of WA 504/2009 2 others, though suffers from the same infirmity, is allowed to stand. The learned senior counsel submitted that there should have been representative impleadment of at least some of the schools and there should have been a notification in the newspapers to the effect that they are impleaded to represent all others in the list. In the absence of following such a procedure, the writ petition was liable to be dismissed. The very same point was canvassed before the learned Single Judge also. But, the said point was repelled, as evident from the discussion contained in paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 of the judgment under appeal. 2. We notice that the grant in favour of one of the schools in the list can be set aside without affecting others. Therefore, the contention of the appellant was rightly rejected by the learned Single Judge. We affirm the said view taken in the judgment under appeal. No other point was canvassed. In the result, the Writ Appeal fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE. nm/