IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY TUESDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2011 / 5TH MAGHA 1932 WA.No. 70 of 2011() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.28888/2010 Dated 10/11/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN W.P.(C): ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KANNUR NORTH,KANNUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. T.B.RAMANI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS IN W.P.(C): ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE MANAGER,KOYYODE MADRASSA U.P.SCHOOL, KOYYODE.P.O,KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 621. 2. VALSAN MATATH IL,MATATHIL HOUSE,MUNDAYAD, CHOVVA.P.O,KANNUR DISTRICT,PIN-670 006. R1 BY ADV. SRI. GEORGE POONTHOTTAM THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss C.N.Ramachandran Nair & Bhabani Prasad Ray, JJ. ==================================== W.A.No.70 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 25th day of January, 2011. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard the Government Pleader and counsel appearing for the respondent. The challenge is against the judgment of the learned single Judge holding that transfer of the school as a going concern with transfer of ownership could be approved by the Director of Public Instruction even after the transfer. Government Pleader's case is that prior permission is a requirement under Rule 5A of Chapter III K.E.R. and so much so, the action of the first respondent is against the Rules. Even though we agree with the contention that prior permission is required before transfer, we have not been told as to how the transfer has adversely affected the interest of anyone concerned or of the Government. Obviously, no qualification is prescribed under the K.E.R. for the manager of the school. However, WA70/11 -:2:- if transfer of management affects the student community or the teachers or staff, certainly it is for the D.P.I. to decline transfer and take appropriate steps permissible under the Act. In this case the State or its agencies have not told us as to how the second respondent is not eligible to manage the school or whether he has any disqualification to the knowledge of the appellant. All what is said is that the approval could be considered for transfer by the D.P.I. after the first respondent effected the transfer in favour of the second respondent. We do not think anything illegal in the judgment because, since transfer has taken place three years back and the school continues to be an aided school, it is for the D.P.I. to consider whether transfer could be approved after the first respondent physically transferred the management of the school. However, if does not approve the transfer for valid reasons, it is for him to take appropriate action against the past or present management or other remedial measures provided under the K.E.R. WA70/11 -:3:- Writ appeal is disposed of as above. C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge. Bhabani Prasad Ray, Judge. sl. WA70/11 -:4:-