IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA No. 2259 of 2005(A)
1. K.A.SIMON, KALATHINGAL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. M.L.MARY, W/O.KOCHUPOULOSE,
... Respondent
2. K.K.PAULSON, KALATHINGAL HOUSE,
3. K.K.BABU, KALATHINGAL HOUSE,
4. K.K.JENNY, D/O.LATE KOCHUPOULOSE AND
5. K.K.MOLLY, W/O.K.A.KOCHIPULOSE &
6. K.K.KOCHURANI, W/O.KOCHU PAULOSE &
7. M.V.ANNIE, W/O.LATE K.A.XAVIER,
8. RAJAN XAVIER, S/O.LATE K.A.XAVIER,
9. SHEELA XAVIER, D/O.LATE K.A.XAVIER,
10. M.V.MARY, W/O.LATE K.A.KOCHANTHONY,
11. K.K.SAJU, S/O.K.A.KOCHANTHONY,
12. K.K.JESSY, D/O.LATE K.A.KOCHANTHONY,
13. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
14. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
15. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
16. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTEDBY THE
For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.N.P.SAMUEL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :06/06/2007
O R D E R
K.S.Radhakrishnan
&
Antony Dominic, JJ.
========================
W.A.No.2259 of 2005
========================
Dated this the 6th day of June, 2007.
JUDGMENT
Radhakrishnan,J.
Writ Petition was preferred by the appellant seeking a writ of
certiorari to quash Ext.P8 order passed by the Government and also
for consequential reliefs. The issue involved in the Writ Petition is
with regard to the right of management of an L.P. School and its
properties belonged to one Kalathingal Anthony. He was also managing
the School. Anthony has four sons. Petitioner is the youngest son.
Anthony executed Ext.P1 Will in respect of all his properties which
include a School building also. As per the terms of the Will, the School
property will vest in one-fourth shares on the sons of Anthony while
WA 2259/05 -: 2 :-
management of the School claims to be vested on the petitioner. On
the basis of a joint application made by the petitioner and Anthony
during the life time of Anthony, the Department transferred
management of the School in favour of the petitioner on 12.12.1965
and the petitioner continued to be the Manager even after the death of
Anthony. Since the petitioner was a Teacher, he transferred his
managership over the School in the year1968 in favour of his sister
Annakutty. Annakutty continued as Manager of the School for 12
years. Later, management was transferred to Kochupoulose, another
brother of the petitioner. In the year 1987 the petitioner retired from
service and the managership was transferred in his favour and transfer
was approved by the Department. The other three brothers of the
petitioner raised a claim that they are also entitled to equal shares
over the managership of the School and that a Corporate Educational
Agency was formed when the testator passed away.
2. Government, when the matter came before it, gave a
direction to the Deputy Director of Education to convene a meeting of
all the legal heirs and to take a decision as per majority for the
constitution of the Corporate Educational Agency and for appointment
of Manager of the School. Aggrieved by Ext.P8 order, petitioner filed
the Writ Petition. Learned single Judge did not interfere with that part
WA 2259/05 -: 3 :-
of Ext.P8 by which the Deputy Director of Education was directed to
convene a meeting of the petitioner and respondents 1 to 12 to take a
decision as to whether the By-laws of the Corporate Educational
Agency should be approved and also as to who should be the Manager
of the School. Learned single Judge did not approve Ext.P8 to the
extent it deals with the validity or otherwise of the sale deed allegedly
executed by the petitioner and the learned single Judge vacated the
finding of the Government in Ext.P8 regarding the validity of the sale
deed observing that that issue should be decided in appropriate other
proceedings to be initiated by any of the parties.
3. Counsel for the respondents submitted that an educational
agency has already been constituted and that has been approved. In
the circumstances, rest of the findings entered by the Government
which were confirmed by the learned single Judge are not to be
disturbed. Counsel for the petitioner has stated that he has preferred
a suit, O.S.No.142 of 2007 at Irinjalakuda Court for a declaration that
he is entitled to get the managership of the School on the strength of
the Will. Since disputes regarding the various terms of the Will is
being considered by the Civil Court, we are not expressing our final
opinion on the terms of the Will. But we make it clear that the views
expressed by this Court as well as by the Government will have no
WA 2259/05 -: 4 :-
bearing with regard to the issues pending consideration by the Civil
Court.
With the above observations, this Writ Appeal is disposed of.
K.S.Radhakrishnan,
Judge.
Antony Dominic,
Judge.
ess 6/6