IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17320 of 2008(J)
1. THE S.U.M, ENGLISH SCHOOL, REPRESENTED
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
3. THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY
For Petitioner :SRI.TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :16/06/2008
O R D E R
K.T. SANKARAN,J.
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.17320 of 2008 J
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner in this Writ Petition is aggrieved by the non-
consideration of the application submitted by him for the issue of “No Objection
Certificate” by the State Government for the purpose of affiliation of his school to
the Central Board of Secondary Education.
2. The reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition are the following:-
(i) To call for the records
relating to Exhibits P-1 to P-4 and to issue a
writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, direction or order directing the
Respondents 1 and 2 to issue NOC to the
Petitioner School – S.U.M. English School at
Olavilam in Kannur District for affiliation to
the Central Board of Secondary Education on
the basis of the re-submission of the
Application in the light of Exhibit P-3
Judgment of this Honourable Court, Apex
Court and Exhibit P-1 Order of 1988;
WP(C) No.17320/2008
2
(ii) To issue a declaration that
the Petitioner School is entitled to get the
NOC from the State Government under
Article 14 & 19 (g) Constitution of India for
affiliation to the CBSE considering the
peculiar nature of the locally especially the
Muslim majority area;
(iii) To issue a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate writ,
direction or order directing the Respondents 1
and 2 to consider Exhibit P-4 Representation
submitted by the Petitioner as early as
possible at any rate within a stipulated time
so as to enable the Petitioner to submit
Application for affiliation to the CBSE;
(iv) To issue any other
appropriate writ, order or direction to meet out
justice under the circumstances of the above
case.”
3. In view of the pendency of Ext.P4 representation before the
first respondent, it is not proper to grant the reliefs other than relief No.(iii).
4. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Ext.P4
representation is not finally disposed of so far. It is also submitted that the
representation submitted by the petitioner would be considered by the first
WP(C) No.17320/2008
3
respondent without much delay. The first respondent is legally bound to dispose
of the representation in accordance with law. Therefore I hold that the
petitioner is entitled to the relief of writ of mandamus directing the first
respondent to dispose of Ext.P4 representation submitted by him for the issue
of N.O.C. The first respondent shall dispose of Ext.P4 representation
submitted by the petitioner for the issue of N.O.C. in accordance with law.
Normally an opportunity of being heard would be afforded to the petitioner; but
the petitioner has waived his right to be heard to facilitate an early disposal of
Ext.P4 representation within a period of one month by the Government. The
petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition before the first respondent
within a period of ten days for the effective consideration and disposal of Ext.P4
representation submitted by him. The first respondent need not issue notice to
the petitioner before passing the order. The final order shall be passed by the
first respondent within a period of one month. It is made clear that I have not
considered the merits of the case for the grant of “No Objection Certificate”.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
cks