Kerala High Court
Fathima Beevi vs The Assistant Educational Officer on 26 June, 1991
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM
THURSDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/6TH CHAITHRA, 1936
WP(C).No. 25731 of 2012 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
--------------------------
FATHIMA BEEVI,AGED 78 YEARS,
W/O SAIDU MOHAMMED MASTER,''ANSAR MANZIL'',
THEKKEPOTTA,PALAKKAD, FORMER MANAGER, ALPS,
KOTTARASSERY ALPS, ALATHUR SUB DISTRICT, ALATHUR,
PALAKKAD.
BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT(S):
----------------------------
1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALATHUR,
PALAKKAD-678 541.
2. SHRI. VASU MASTER,S/O KRISHNAN,
KAVASSERY AMSOM, ALATHUR TALUK,
PALAKKAD-678 541.
3. THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001
R1,R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LOWSY.A.
R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.MUHAMMED
SRI.K.E.HAMZA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 27-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C)NO.25731/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED
26.6.1991.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER
AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 29.9.2011.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED
31.12.2011.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DATED 1.2.2012 TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT .
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 1.2.2012 ISSUED TOT HE
IST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 17.2.2012.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTARIZED DECLARATION DATED 3.7.2012.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.16216/2012
DATED 13.7.2012.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C/400/2012 DATED 23.8.2012.
EXHIBIT P10: TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 12/3/2014 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 29/9/2011 EXECUTED
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 6/2/2012
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO.JUDGE
sts
C.K.ABDUL REHIM,J.
-------------------------------
WP(C).NO. 25731 of 2012
---------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March , 2014
JUDGMENT
Dispute involved pertains to managership of the aided LP school (ALPS), Kottarassery, Alathur. The petitioner claims to be the educational agency coming within the purview of Rule (1) of Chapter III KER. The petitioner was acting as the Manager of the school, consequent to death of her husband, who was the previous Manager approved by the educational officer. By virtue of Ext.P2 agreement executed between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, the property of the school was offered to be transferred in favour of the 2nd respondent. On that basis a change in the personnel of the management of the school was permitted in favour of the 2nd respondent, as per Ext.P3 proceedings issued by the 1st respondent. According to the petitioner, the 2nd respondent had failed to fulfill his obligations under the sale agreement and therefore Ext. P7 declaration was made by the members of the educational agency, withdrawing WP(C). 25731 /2012 2 the consent given to the 2nd respondent to act as Manager of the school. A request in this regard was sent to the 1st respondent and a direction was obtained from this court in Ext.P8 judgment to consider the same. The 1st respondent issued Ext.P9 proceedings declining to transfer managership of the school, finding that the managership was transferred earlier in favour of the 2nd respondent on the basis of request of the petitioner, stating the reason of old age and illness. It is also found that there exists a civil dispute with respect to transfer of the property, which can be decided only by a competent civil court. Reserving liberty of the petitioner to approach the civil court to secure final settlement on the dispute, it is held that the proceedings appointing the 2nd respondent as Manager will continue. Aggrieved by Ext.P9 proceedings the petitioner had preferred appeal before the 4th respondent as evidenced from Ext.P10. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks a direction for an early disposal of Ext.P10 by the 4th respondent.
2. The 2nd respondent had filed counter affidavit disputing allegations. He had placed reliance on Ext.P2 agreement to WP(C). 25731 /2012 3 contend that he is legally entitled to continue as Manager.
3. Heard; learned Government Pleader as well as counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. Considering the fact that an appeal filed by the petitioner against Ext.P9 proceedings is now pending consideration and disposal before the 4th respondent, interest of justice will be achieved by directing an early disposal of the same.
4. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of by directing the 4th respondent to consider and dispose of Ext.P10 appeal, after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, 2nd respondent and the educational officer concerned. The appeal shall be disposed of at the earliest possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE
pmn/
WP(C). 25731 /2012 4
WP(C). 25731 /2012 5