IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN TUESDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1931 WA.No. 2291 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.22131/2007 Dated 13/11/2008 .................... APPELLANT: RESPONDENT NO.4 IN THE WPC ---------------------------------------- DR.P.V.JOSEPH, PUKKUNNEL HOUSE, PUTHUPADY P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SMT.N.SANTHA SRI.S.A.ANAND SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE WPC --------------------------------------------------------- 1. PRASAD P.VARGHESE, MANAGER, FATHER JOSEPH MEMORIAL HIGH SCHOOL, PUTHUPADY, MUVATTUPUZHA. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, KOTHAMANGALAM. ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE -R1 SRI.S.RAMESH BABU GOVT. PLEADER SMT.R.BINDU FOR R2 TO R4 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/11/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 15983 OF 2009 WPC NO. 19263 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ. ------------------------------ W.A.NO.2291/2008 & W.P.(C) NOS.15983 & 19263/2009 ------------------------------ Dated this, the 17th day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The subject-matter of the dispute involved in these cases is the same. So, they are heard and disposed of by this common judgment. W.A.No.2291/2008 is treated as the main case for the purpose of referring to the parties and exhibits. 2. The appellant was the 4th respondent in the Writ Petition. The 1st respondent herein was the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent challenging Ext.P6 order of the Additional Director of Public Instruction dated 7.12.2006 and Ext.P11 order of the Government dated 13.07.2007, affirming the same. As per those orders, the appellant was to be approved as the Manager of Fr.Joseph Memorial Higher Secondary School, Puthuppady, Muvattupuzha. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, quashed WA 2291/08 & WPC 15983 & 19263/09 - 2 - those orders and directed the Director of Public Instruction to consider the appeal filed by the 4th respondent (appellant herein) against Ext.P2 order of the District Educational Officer, approving the 1st respondent as Manager. Feeling aggrieved by the said direction, the appellant has preferred this appeal. 3. We noted that the appellant and the 1st respondent are brothers. The original educational agency was their father Mr.P.J.Varkey, Pukkunnel House, Puthuppady. He died intestate. Later, their mother also died intestate. They have two sisters. They are married and they are having separate families. In view of the provisions of the Kerala Education Rules, now the educational agency has become a corporate educational agency consisting of the appellant, the 1st respondent and their sisters. So, for management of the school, a bye-law has to be got approved by the Director of Public Instruction and the school has to be run in accordance with the approved bye-laws. In the light of the above facts, the claims of both the brothers for managing the school exclusively are bound to fail. When these facts were pointed out by us and WA 2291/08 & WPC 15983 & 19263/09 - 3 - suggested to them to arrive at a consensus regarding the interim management of the school pending approval of the bye- laws, the parties readily agreed. Today, the learned counsel on both sides have come forward with a settlement concerning the dispute between them. There is give and take, as both sides generously gave up some of their claims and agreed to the following terms: (1) The members of the educational agency will move the statutory authority with appropriate new bye- laws or move for modification of the existing bye- laws and get it approved as early as possible. (2) Pending approval of the bye-laws, for a period of one year from today, the appellant will function as the Manager. If the bye-laws are not approved within one year, for the next term of one year the 1st respondent herein will act as the Manager. If, for any reason, the approval of the bye-laws is delayed, the management of the school shall be by rotation among the appellant and the 1st respondent, the term being one year at a time. If the bye-laws are approved within one year, the management of the school thereafter will be in accordance with the bye- WA 2291/08 & WPC 15983 & 19263/09 - 4 - laws. (3) At present, there are four vacancies in the High School wing of the school. Two of them shall be filled up by the nominees of the appellant and the remaining two by the nominees of the 1st respondent. (4) The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19263/2009 is appointed by the appellant in the Higher Secondary Wing of the School. We are told that approval of that appointment has been declined for the reason of management dispute. If her appointment is liable to be approved provided there was no management dispute, the same shall be approved by the competent authority. But, the next vacancy arising in the Higher Secondary Wing shall be filled up by the nominee of the 1st respondent. (5) Till the approved bye-laws come into force, all vacancies arising in the school shall be filled up based on the consensus between the appellant and the 1st respondent. The Manager in office at the relevant time shall fully co-operate for appointment and approval of the nominee of the other side by issuing the appointment order and moving the competent WA 2291/08 & WPC 15983 & 19263/09 - 5 - authority for approval. (6) If any appointment already made, which could have been approved but for management dispute and not covered by any of the above clauses, requires to be approved, the same shall be done based on the joint motion made by the appellant and the 1st respondent. The vacancies shall be shared by them equally. If, in case there is only one vacancy and therefore, it cannot be shared, the next arising vacancy shall be given to the other side. The Writ Appeal and the Writ Petitions are disposed of in terms of the above settlement arrived at between the appellant and the 1st respondent in the Writ Appeal. We make it clear that if any of the sisters of the appellant and the 1st respondent has any dispute regarding the management of the school, their claims will not be affected by the above said settlement and this judgment. The arrangement mentioned above will continue till the approval of the bye-laws. The above arrangement or this judgment will not affect the powers of the competent civil court WA 2291/08 & WPC 15983 & 19263/09 - 6 - to entertain any suit involving dispute regarding the management of the school and to render a decision on merits. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P. Bhavadasan, Judge. nm.