IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 2965 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.18218/2006 Dated 25/09/2007 .................... APPELLANT: -------------- K.J.ANTONY, S/O.PUNNOOSE JOSEPH, AGED 55 YEARS, UPPER PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHER, A.M.U.P.SCHOOL, POOLAMANGALAM, PUNNATHALA.P.O. MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 552. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR 4. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KUTTIPPURAM. 5. THE MANAGER, A.M.U.P.SCHOOL, POOLAMANGALAM, PUNNATHALA P.O. MALAPPURAM. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER R5 BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2010, ALONG WITH WA NO.2967 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... Writ Appeal Nos.2965 & 2967 of 2007 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The connected appeals are filed by a retired school teacher of the A.M.U.P. School, Poolamangalam, challenging the appointment by the management of another person as the Headmaster. The vacancy for the Headmaster in the school arose on 1.5.2005. In fact, the person first appointed was found to be not qualified and, therefore, the management appointed another person by name Mr.Narayanan Nair on 1.6.2005. The petitioner's case is that he being a Degree holder with B.Ed. has superior claims over the said Mr.Narayanan Nair for appointment as Headmaster. However, management's case is that their's is a minority institution and based on their application on 24.6.2005, Government vide order dated 17.4.2006 declared the minority status of the educational institution. Even though petitioner challenged the denial of appointment as Headmaster to him before the learned Single Judge, the claim was rejected through the common W.P. 2965&2967/07 2 judgment whereunder the Single Judge disposed of petitioner's writ petition and the writ petition filed by the management along with Headmaster appointed by them as petitioners. 2. Even though counsel for the petitioner has relied on several judgments and claimed that petitioner has superior claims over the Headmaster appointed by the management, there is no dispute that besides the relative superior merits the appellant has over the person appointed, the Headmaster appointed had the qualification required to hold the post. It is the settled position in law that a minority educational institution has a choice for appointment of Headmaster or Principal of the educational institution and the only fetter is that the person appointed should have the required qualification. In other words, even after ignoring relative superior claims of others, any person can be appointed to be the Headmaster by the management of a minority institution, if such person has the qualification. In this case the application claiming minority status by the manager was pending when the vacancy arose. Later, Government declared the status of the school as a school run by the minority community and so much so, the W.P. 2965&2967/07 3 manager appointed a person of their choice who admittedly had the qualification. So much so, petitioner's claim fails and was rightly turned down by the learned Single Judge. We find no merit in the Writ Appeals and are therefore dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms