IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 37602 of 2009(U)
1. A. BHARGAVI, W/O. C.V. NANU,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
... Respondent
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBILC INSTRUCTIONS,
4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.R.SURENDRAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :15/02/2010
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 37602 of 2009
==================
Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition relates to the right to managership of Sree
Narayana Basic Upper Primary School, Vadakkumpad, Thalassery,
which originally belonged to one K.P.Govindan, the father of the
petitioner. Sri.Govindan is no more. On his death, the management of
the school devolved by succession on the petitioner and her brothers
and sisters jointly. The legal heirs are five in number. A dispute arose
among them regarding as to who should be the manager. The
Director of Public Instruction considered the dispute and passed Ext.P1
order in favour of the petitioner. Challenge by two of the legal heirs to
Ext.P1 was rejected by Ext.P2 order of the 4th respondent-Government
of Kerala. That was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C).
No.27680/2008, which was dismissed by Ext.P3 judgment. Pursuant
thereto, by Ext.P4, the 2nd respondent recognized the petitioner as the
manager of the school and directed preparation of a bye-law for the
management of the school for approval. According to the petitioner,
after giving notice to all the legal heirs as well as the A.E.O. Ext.P9
bye-law was framed. Despite notice regarding the meeting for
approval of the same, the A.E.O. and two of the members of the
educational agency did not participate in the meeting. Consequently,
2
by majority, the educational agency approved the bye-law. Ext.P9 bye-
law was forwarded to the 1st respondent by Ext.P10 for approval. In
the meantime, the term of appointment of the petitioner as the
manager as per Ext.P4 was to expire on 27.12.2009. The petitioner’s
Ext.P11 request for extension of the period of the petitioner’s
appointment as manager was not considered by the 2nd respondent. It
is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ
petition seeking the following reliefs:
“a) Mandamus directing the second respondent to issue appropriate
orders on or before 27.12.2009, extending the period of
appointment of petitioner as Manager of Sree Narayana Basic
Upper Primary School, Vadakkumpad, Thalassery, till the Exhibit
P9 byelaw is approved by the first respondent.
b) Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider and approve
the Exhibit P9 byelaw within a time limit that may be fixed by this
honourable court;”
2. The learned Government Pleader submits that two of the
members of the educational agency have not signed the bye-law and,
therefore, the A.E.O. has forwarded copies of the bye-law to those
two persons for their opinion on the same.
3. I have considered the rival contentions in detail.
4. I am of opinion that the if the majority of the members of
the educational agency has approved the bye-law, simply because
minority refuses to accept same, the same does not become
automatically invalid unless the same is contrary to the Kerala
3
Education Act and Rules or any other legal provision. As such, simply
because a minority of the members of the educational agency opposes
the bye-law, the 1st respondent cannot deny approval to the bye-law
on that ground. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is
disposed of with the following directions:
The 1st respondent shall consider the question of approval of
Ext.P9 bye-law and pass orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible,
at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a certified
copy of this judgment. Till then, the interim order passed on
23.12.2009, which was extended by order dated 11.1.2010, would
continue to be in force.
Sd/-
sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
///True copy///
P.A. to Judge