Sabitha K.V. Sreya and Satheesan K.V. vs State of Kerala and Others (WP(C).37814/2015, WP(C).21246/2016, WP(C).24498/2017)

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 15TH MAGHA,1942** ## **WP(C).No.37814 OF 2015(B)** ## **PETITIONER:** **SABITHA K.V. AGED 58 YEARS SREYAS, PADANNAKKAD P.O, KASARAGODE 671314.** **BY ADVS. SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.** **2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014.** **3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION CIVIL STATION, KASARAGOD 671 123.** - **4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER MINI CIVIL STATION, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD 671 315.** - **5 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER HOSDURG, POST KANJANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, 671 315.** - **6 SATHEESAN K.V VAISHNAV, WEAVERS STREET, NILESHWAR 671 314.** **R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R1, R6 BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).21246/2016(E), WP(C).24498/2017(J), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **2** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 15TH MAGHA,1942** ## **WP(C).No.21246 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER:** **SATHEESAN K.V** **AGED 64 YEARS, S/O. K.V.KUNHAMBU, MANAGER,SREE NARAYANA TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE (SNTTI), PADANNAKKAD, PIN-671 415.** **BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.** **3 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER MINI CIVIL STATION, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD-671 315.** **4 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER HOSDURG, P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671 315. 5 SABITHA K.V. SREYAS, PADANNAKKAD P.O., KASARAGOD-671 314.** **R1, R5 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI R1-4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).37814/2015(B), WP(C).24498/2017(J), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **3** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 15TH MAGHA,1942** ## **WP(C).No.24498 OF 2017** ## **PETITIONER:** **SATHEESAN.K.V AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.K.V KUNHAMBU, MANAGER,SREE NARAYANA TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE ( SNTTI),PADANNAKAD, PIN 671415** **BY ADVS. SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.)** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695001** **2 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION JAGATHY, THIRUANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695014** - **3 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KASARAGOD, VIDYA NAGAR,PIN 671123** - **4 THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER MINI CIVIL STATION, KANHANGAD,KASARAGOD 671315** - **5 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER HOSDURG, P.O.KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTIRCT, PIN 671315** - **6 SABITHA K.V. SREYAS, PADANNAKKAD PO,KASARAGOD 671314** **R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER R1, R6 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI SRI. P.M.MANOJ - SR.GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).37814/2015(B), WP(C).21246/2016(E), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **4** ## **JUDGMENT** These three writ petitions have arisen out of a dispute regarding the Managership of 'Sree Narayana Teachers Training Institute', Nileshwar and 'Sree Narayana Aided UP School', Padannakad, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Schools' for short). 2. It is common ground among the rival parties that the Schools were originally owned by their father - Shri.K.V.Kunhambu, and that subsequent to his death, a partition deed was registered among the members of the family, which included their deceased mother also, keeping the property of the Schools in common and mandating that as long as the mother is alive, she will be its Manager. 3. Consequent to the death of the mother of the petitioner on 12/08/2013, a question arose that who should be in management. **==> picture [344 x 13] intentionally omitted <==** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **5** W.P(C)No.32814 of 2015, stakes a claim in preference to all her siblings, who are six in number, on the strength of an alleged Will stated to have been executed by their mother, a copy of which is on record as Ext.P2 in the said writ petition. 5. Smt.Sabitha asserts that since her mother, who was the Manager until her death, had bequeathed the rights of managership to her, she alone can be appointed as the Manager; while her siblings, led by the elder brother Shri.Satheesan K.V., contends that even if the Will is found to be genuine (which they do not admit), it would concede no rights to Smt.Sabitha, since their mother could not have bequeathed the right of managership, as if it is a heritable right. 6. Shri.Satheesan, thus impells a claim to be the Manager of the Schools on the strength of all his siblings, except Smt.Sabitha; and he was, in fact, so **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **6** approved, but with a condition that he shall not make any appointments to the School. This order of the competent Educational Authority was challenged by Shri.Satheesan in W.P(C)No.21246 of 2016; and while matters were thus pending, taking note of the internecine disputes between the rival parties, Government of Kerala, acting on the representations of Smt.Sabitha and in obedience to the directions of this Court in W.P(C)No.16491 of 2017 filed by Shri.Satheesan K.V., issued Ext.P23 order holding that since the disputes between the parties are unresolved, the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, will function as the Manager of the Schools, until such time as the Bye-law with respect to its management are properly settled, under the provisions of the Kerala Education Act and Rules (hereinafter after referred to as 'the Act' and 'KER' for short respectively). **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **7** Shri.Satheesan challenges this order by filing W.P(C)No.24498 of 2017, wherein, it has been produced as Ext.P23. 7. In the meanwhile, it transpires that Shri.Satheesan and his five siblings, except Smt.Sabitha, approached the District Educational Officer, Kasaragod, after framing a Bye-law and sought its approval, but that proceedings on the same is still pending; and he thus asserts that, in such circumstances, Government could not have appointed the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, as an interim Manager, since he enjoys the support of majority of the members of the Educational Agency, thus he alone being deserving to have been approved as the Manager of the Schools. 8. It is in the background of the afore narrated facts that these writ petitions will require to be considered by me. **==> picture [344 x 13] intentionally omitted <==** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** ## **8** learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Shri.Millu Dandapani, learned counsel appearing for Smt.Sabitha.K.V. - petitioner in W.P(C)No.37814 of 2015 and Shri.Jaju Babu, learned Senior Counsel instructed by Shri.T.K.Vipindas, learned counsel appearing for Shri.Satheesan K.V. - petitioner in W.P(C)Nos.21246 of 2016 and 24498 of 2017. 10. The factual controversy in these cases is not in a very large compass. 11. Smt.Sabitha, as I have said above, claims rights to be appointed and approved as the Manager of the Schools on the strength of a Will executed by her mother; while Shri.Satheesan - her brother, stakes a rival claim on the strength of support from all the other siblings, who are five in number. **==> picture [344 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** consider is whether Smt.Sabitha can obtain any exclusive rights over the managership of the Schools on the strength of the Will of **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **9** her mother, even assuming that said document can be treated to be valid in law. 13. In this regard, it is indubitable that the parties are _ad idem_ that the properties of the Schools are kept in common and that all of them are its joint owners. The mother was allowed, by all the children subsequent to the death of their father, to act as the Manager of the Schools and she had been so approved by the Educational Authorities under the provisions of the Act and the KER. 14. It is now well settled that the managership of a school is not a civil right but is a statutory one, particularly because any person who is so appointed will require to obtain the concurrence of the competent and statutory Authorities under the Act and the KER. 15. In that perspective, when the father of the petitioners died intestate, all his **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **10** legal heirs became entitled to the property and this is luculent from the partition deed executed by them subsequently, wherein, the properties of the Schools were kept in common. Obviously, therefore, the Schools came under the management of a Corporate Educational Agency. There can be no doubt about this because these issues have already been settled by a learned Division Bench of this Court in _**Somanatha Pillai v. State of**_ _**Kerala**_ [2007 (1) KLT 127] wherein, the affirmative declaration in law is that “when a Manager of a School dies and his legal representative continue in management, they can only be construed as a Corporate Educational Agency and not as an Individual Educational Agency.” 16. Pertinently thus, when Shri.K.V. Kunhambu died, his wife and children became the Corporate Educational Agency. The children then allowed the mother, by their **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **11** express consent, to act as the Manager and she was so approved by the competent Educational Authority. However, this could not have given any right to the mother of the petitioners to have executed a Will bequeathing the managership, after her time, to one of her children, as has been done through Ext.P2, produced along with W.P(C)No.37814 of 2015. 17. I am, therefore, certainly of the view that even if the Will is taken to be genuine, it would concede no right to Smt.Sabitha to stake a claim as the exclusive Manager of the Schools – he, at the best, being only a member of the Corporate Educational Agency – which came into being immediately on the death of her father Sri.K.V.Kunhambu. 18. That said, it is conceded by both sides that there is no approved Bye-law for management as far as the Schools are **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **12** concerned and that the one which is framed by Shri.Satheesan and five of his siblings is now pending approval before the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, a copy of which is on record as Ext.P28 in W.P(C)No.24498 of 2017. 19. Since the parties now say that there has been no consensus among the group led by Shri.Satheesan on one side and Smt.Sabitha on the other, with respect to the Bye-law, I am of the certain view that the matter should be considered and concluded by the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, appropriately, after giving necessary opportunities of being heard to both sides. 20. In the meanwhile, I am of the firm view that, on account of the internecine disputes between the parties, the position as governed by Ext.P23 order of the Government - produced along with W.P(C)No.24498 of 2017 - should continue, since the Deputy Director of **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **==> picture [15 x 9] intentionally omitted <==** Education has been conducting himself as the Manager of the Schools for the last more than three years, under its mandate. Resultantly, I order these writ petitions directing the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, to immediately call a meeting of all the members of the Corporate Educational Agency and thereafter, grant an opportunity to Smt.Sabitha to raise objections to the Bye-law framed by Shri.Satheesan and five other siblings, namely Ext.P28 in W.P(C)No.24498 of 2017 and also be given an opportunity of producing an independent Bye-law on her own, if she is so interested; and then assess the same, after affording necessary opportunities of being heard to all of them, leading to appropriate orders approving a final Bye-law for the management of the Schools in terms of the applicable provisions of the Act and the KER. The afore exercise shall be completed by **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **14** the Deputy Director of Education, Kasaragod, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; and until such time as the resultant order is issued or until the afore fixed time expires, which ever is earlier, the Schools will be managed by the said Authority in terms of Ext.P23 in W.P(C)No.24498 of 2017. It is needless to say that any decision to be taken by the Deputy Director of Education in terms of the afore directions will be untrammeled by any of the orders impugned in these cases, which I do not propose to set aside formally because of the fact that they will all become irrelevant when the afore directions are complied with. ## **Sd/-** ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** ## **JUDGE** **MC/9.2.21** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **15** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37814/2015** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS B213839/78 DATED 7.6.78.** **EXHIBIT P2 EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE WILL DATED 27.10.09 OF THE MOTHER. EXHIBIT P3 EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B3-5536/13 DATED 11.10.13 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF 6TH RESPONDENT AS MANAGER OF THE SCHOOL.** **EXHIBIT P3(A) EXHIBIT P3(A). COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C/4653/2013 DATED 31.10.13 BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT APPROVING THE APPOINTMENT OF 6TH RESPONDENT AS MANAGER OF THE SCHOOL.** **EXHIBIT P4 EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 29.10.13 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P3 ORDER.** **EXHIBIT P4(A) EXHIBIT P4(A). COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 11.11.13 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT FILED AGAINST EXHIBIT P3(A) ORDER. EXHIBIT P5 EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY APPEAL MEMO DATED 23/25.11.13. EXHIBIT P6 EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE HEARING NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 19.5.14. EXHIBIT P7 EXHIBIT P7. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.10.14 REJECTING THE APPEAL EXHIBIT P4 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 EXHIBIT P8. COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION DATED 14.11.14. EXHIBIT P9 EXHIBIT P9. COPY OF THE DISMISSAL OF REVISION PETITION BY THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 16.10.15. EXHIBIT P10 EXHIBIT P10. COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DEO DATED 12.11.15.** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **16** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.B2/4581/2015 DATED 28.7.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE HEARDMASTER, SNTTI NILESHWAR, KASARAGOD, DATED 10.08.2015 EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 22.11.2015 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED BEARING NO.3866 DATED DTD 06.09.2011** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **17** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21246/2016** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P13** **COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS.B2-13839/78 DTD.7.6.1978 ASSIGNED BY 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DTD.1.4.2019 ISSUED BY THE SIBLINGS OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD.11.10.2013.** **EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD.31.10.2013.** **EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD.13.10.2014 ON THE APPEALS AGAINST EXT.P3 AND P4.** **EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE ORDER OF 1ST RESPONDENT DTD.16.10.2015.** **EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD.12.11.2015. EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF THE LAST PAY CERTIFICATE OF CHANDRAN C. DTD.31.5.2016.** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R5(A) A TRUE COPY UNREGISTERED WILL DATED 27.10.2009 EXECUTED BY M.V.SATHYABHAMA, REFERRED TO IN THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **18** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24498/2017** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K.DIS.B213839/78 DATED 07.06.1978 ASSIGNED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DATED 01.04.2015 ISSUED BY THE SIBLINGS OF THE PETITIONER** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 11.10.2013** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 31.10.2013** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 13.10.2014 ON THE APPEALS AGAINST EXHIBIT P3 AND P4** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT** **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 14.11.2014 ISSUED THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 16.11.2014 CONVENED PURSUANT TO EXHIBIT P5 ORDER EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15.12.2014 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER CONVENING MEETING ON 24.12.2014** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 18.12.2014 ISSUED BY 6TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 24.12.2014 EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 26.01.2015 EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.10.2015 EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **19** **RESPONDENT DATED 12.11.2015** **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION NO. B2/4581/2015 DATED 28.07.2015 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITOINER** **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO. 30835/2015, 9424/2016 AND 32375/2016 DATED 02.12.2016 EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.04.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO. 16491/2017 DATED 23.05.2017 EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 13.06.2017 IN RP.NO. 456/2017 EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16.06.2017 ISSUED BY ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITON DATED 10.03.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P22 `TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTES FILED BEFORE UNDER SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER DATED 20.06.2017** - **EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17.07.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT 24 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, HOSDURG IN OS.NO. 276/2014** - **EXHIBIT P25 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 16/11/2014** - **EXHIBIT P26 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 24/12/2014** - **EXHIBIT P27 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING DATED 26/01/2015** - **EXHIBIT P28 TRUE COPY OF THE TRUST DEED DATED 18/03/2015** - **EXHIBIT P29 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICCATION DATED 14/08/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.** **WP(C).No.37814/2015 & Con. Cases** **20** |**EXHIBIT P30**|**TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 5-8-20-19**| |---|---| ||**ISSUED BY HEADMISTRESS, SNAUP SCHOOL.**| |**EXHIBIT P31**|**TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10-6-2019**| ||**ISSUED BY HEADMISTRESS, SREE NARAYANA**| ||**TEACHERS TRAINING INSTITUTE, NILESHWAR**|