IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 1ST AUGUST 2011 / 10TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20869 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ C.M.BABU,'SANTHIGRUHA', NEAR MEENMUTTY WATER FALLS, PO CHELLANGODE, VADUVANCHAL,WAYANAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DIOCESE OF NORTH KERALA, CHURCH OF SOUTH INDIA, CSI DIOCESAN OFFICE, SHORNUR, KERALA,PIN 679 121, REP.BY REV.DR.K.P.KURUVILA. 2. THE DIOCESAN EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, CHURTH OF SOUTH INDIA, CSI DIOCESAN OFFICE, SHORNUR,KERALA,PIN 679 121, REP.BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695 014. 4. REV.FR.VINOD ALLAN,SAMUEL HEBICS, CHOWA, KANNUR,PIN 670 006. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.C.K.GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 20869 of 2011(G) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT.P1. COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT, PAGES 129, 130 & 131. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DATED 26.10.2010. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT DT. 27.10.2010. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT DT. 27.10.10. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF MANAGEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THIRD RESPONDENT DT. 20.10.2010. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THIRD RESPONDENT DT. 9.12.2010. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY SECOND RESPONDENT DT. 11.7.2011. EXT.P8. COPY of the REPLY ISSUED BY PETITIONER DT. 15.7.2011. EXT.P9. COPY F THE ORDER ISSUED BY DT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL ---------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 20869 of 2011 ================== Dated this the 1st day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was a corporate manager appointed by an educational agency of an aided school. Now, by Ext.P9 order, the educational agency has removed the petitioner from managership and another person has been appointed as manager. The petitioner is challenging that order seeking the following reliefs; “i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ order or direction calling for the records leading to the issue of Ext.P9 and quash the same. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other writ or order directing the third respondent not to consider or allow the request of the respondents 1 & 2 to approve the fourth respondent as Corporate Manager of the School owned by the first respondent.” 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the cancellation of the petitioner's managership is in violation of the constitution of the educational agency. I am of opinion that this Court cannot interfere with the order of an educational agency appointing or removing a manager. That is a private contract between the educational agency and the person appointed as the manager and is not amenable to the power of judicial review of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India unless the same is in exercise of a statutory provision. Here the action impugned does not violate any statutory provision. If the petitioner has any grievance in respect of the same, w.p.c.20869/11 2 his remedy lies in filing a suit. In any event, respondents 1, 2 and 4 are not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court insofar as no action of theirs in exercise of any statutory function is under challenge in this writ petition. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek remedies in a suit, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge