High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petition disposed of with directions to co...

The President and Secretary, Consortium of Catholic School Management in Kerala v State of Kerala and Others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • N. Nagareesh
Judgment Date
2025-04-07
Court Decision / Holding
The writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P8 representation submitted by the petitioners within four months in the light of Exts. P3 and P4.
Final Disposition
Writ petition disposed of with directions to consider Ext. P8 within four months in light of Exts. P3 and P4. 198

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • The President, Consortium of Catholic School Management in Kerala
  • The Secretary, Consortium of Catholic School Management in Kerala

Respondents

  • The State of Kerala represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, General Education Department
  • The Director of General Education (Higher Secondary)
  • The Director of General Education (Vocational Higher Secondary)
  • The Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education (Thavakkara, Kannur District)
  • The Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education (Calicut)
  • The Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education (Thiruvananthapuram)
  • The Regional Deputy Director of Higher Secondary Education (Chengannur)
  • The Subordinate Officers of Higher Secondary Education (multiple offices)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • V.A. Muhammed
  • • M. Sajjad

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Sri. P. Santhosh Kumar, Spl. Government Pleader

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition (WP(C) 14317/2025) challenges denial of 4% reservation for differently-abled persons in appointments to aided schools under the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016. The petitioners, being the President and Secretary of the Consortium of Catholic School Management in Kerala, contend that 4% vacancies for differently-abled candidates must be implemented across their managements as well and that Exts. P1 and P2 demonstrate compliance with the statutory requirement. They state that the Employment Exchange is processing posts reserved for differently-abled candidates, but actual appointments are hindered by issues in identifying qualified physically disabled candidates. The petition cites the NSS Management’s success before the apex court, resulting in Ext. P3 (order dated 04.03.2025) and Ext. P4 (G.O. dated 17.03.2025), arguing that the benefits should apply to similarly situated institutions beyond the NSS Management. They rely on Central Finance and Investments v. Secretary, Kothamangalam Municipality (2021) and Somukuttan Nair v. State of Kerala (1997) to urge extension of relief to petitioners. The respondents contend Ext. P3 applies only to the parties before the apex court, and Ext. P4 is limited in scope. The court, noting Ext. P8 is pending, directs the government to consider Ext. P8 in light of Exts. P3 and P4 within four months, without adjudicating the broader issue.

Provisions of Law Cited

Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners argued that 4% reservation for differently-abled persons in appointments applies to aided schools and that Exts. P3 (Apex Court order) and P4 (government order) should extend benefits to similarly situated managements beyond NSS Management. They relied on extant judgments (Central Finance & Investments v. Secretary, Kothamangalam Municipality; Somukuttan Nair v. State of Kerala) to justify relief via Ext. P8.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contended that Ext. P3 is binding only on parties before the apex court and Ext. P4 is applicable to NSS Management schools; the petitioners cannot claim general extension without a formal adjudication. They urged caution and adherence to the scope of the orders before the apex court.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Central Finance and Investments and another v. Secretary, Kothamangalam Municipality and others2021 (6) KHC 59PositiveCited to support that benefits flowing from Exts. P3 and P4 should extend to similarly situated petitioners and cannot be denied.
Somukuttan Nair v. State of Kerala1997 KHC 114PositiveCited as authority for extending relief to petitioners in analogous circumstances.
Order in Civil Appeal No. SLP No.11373/2024SLP No.11373/2024PositiveApex Court order cited as the basis for applying Exts. P3 and P4 beyond the SLP party scope.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against The President and Secretary, Consortium of Catholic School Management in Kerala v State of Kerala and Others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1947 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 14317 OF 2025`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** ``` 1THE PRESIDENT (FR.DOMINIC AYALOOPARAMBIL), CONSORTIUM OF CATHOLIC SCHOOL, MANAGEMENT IN KERALA AGED 55 YEARS S/O EAPEN K PASTORAL ORIENTATION CENTRE, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI–682 025 (RESIDING AT PASTORAL CENTRE, KANJIRAPALLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT), PIN - 686507 ``` ``` 2THE SECRETARY (FR.ANTONEY GEORGE PATTAPARAMBIL) AGED 51 YEARS S/O GEORGE P.C CONSORTIUM OF CATHOLIC SCHOOL, MANAGEMENT IN KERALA PASTORAL ORIENTATION CENTRE, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI–682 025 (RESIDING AT VIJAYAPURAM BISHOP’S HOUSE, P.B.NO.82, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT), PIN - 686001 ``` ``` BY ADVS. V.A.MUHAMMED M.SAJJAD ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,`** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2 ``` ``` SECRETARIAT ANNEX II, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 ``` - **`2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION (HIGHER SECONDARY) NEW BUILDING, ULLOOR LANE, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014`** - **`3 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION (VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY) JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014`** - **`4 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION THAVAKKARA, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670002`** - **`5 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION`** - **`OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION CALICUT, PIN - 673001`** - **`6 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION CIVIL STATION ROAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505`** - **`7 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION OFFICE THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682011`** - **`8 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION NEAR PULIMOODU JN, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686001`** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 ``` ``` 3 ``` - **`9 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 689121`** - **`10 THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033`** - **`11 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION VIDYANAGAR PO, KASARGODE DISTRICT, PIN - 671123`** - **`12 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION PUZHATHI HOUSING COLONY, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670002`** - **`13 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KALPETTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT, PIN - 673122`** - **`14 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MANANCHIRA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673001`** - **`15 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION DOWN HILL, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505`** - **`16 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003`** - **`17 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685584`** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 4 ``` - **`18 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682030`** - **`19 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION PALACE RD, KOTTAYAM, DISTRICT, PIN - 686001`** - **`20 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KODIVEEDU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 688001`** - **`21 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THIRUVALLA PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689101`** - **`22 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THEVALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691009`** - **`23 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION PADMAVILASOM ROAD, FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023`** ## **`SRI. P.SANTHOSH KUMAR,SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER`** ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## `2025:KER:30380` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 5 ``` ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 7[th] day of April, 2025 The petitioners are the President and Secretary of Consortium of Catholic School, Management in Kerala 2. The Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016 requires 4% reservation in appointments for differently abled hands. It is made applicable to the Aided Schools as well. The turn of appointments is also prescribed as 1, 26, 51, and 76 for differently abled hands. In compliance, the petitioners have set apart posts and vacancies to receive. 3. The petitioners have complied with the requirements covered by Exts.P1 and P2. Employment Exchange concerned is busy with the processing of candidates for the posts set apart for differently abled hand. Other appointments effected by the petitioners against regular posts under the **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 6 ``` Management are not processed by the Educational Officer concerned for want of physical indictment of qualified differently abled hands for the posts reported for differently abled hands. 4. In similar circumstances, the NSS Management moved the Apex Court and got Ext.P3 order dated 04.03.2025. Consequently, the Government issued Ext.P4 order dated 17.03.2025. But it would appear that Ext.P4 is applicable only in respect of the Schools under the NSS Management. The benefits flowing from Exts.P3 and P4 ought to have been made applicable in respect of the appointments under the Managements that are similarly situated. 5. In the light of the judgments in **Central Finance and Investments and another v. Secretary, Kothamangalam Municipality and others** [2021 (6) KHC 59] and **Somukuttan Nair v. State of Kerala** [1997 KHC 114], the benefits flowing from Exts.P3 and P4 cannot be denied to **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 7 ``` the petitioners. In such circumstances, the petitioners filed Ext.P8 representation before the 1[st] respondent, which is pending consideration, contend the petitioners. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents. 7. I find that in similar circumstances, the NSS Management approached the Hon’ble Apex Court and the Apex Court has passed order dated 04.03.2025. The Government is taking a stand that the order will apply only to the parties to the SLP before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The petitioners would contend that claims of persons like the petitioners, who did not approach the Court for redressal of their grievances, there is absolutely no justification for the Government to deny consequential benefits to similarly situated persons. **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 8 ``` 8. Be that as it may, at this stage, I do not deem it necessary to adjudicate the issue as the petitioners have submitted Ext.P8 representation before the Government. It would be sufficient if the Government considers Ext.P8 representation in the light of the directions contained in Exts.P3 and P4. The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 1[st] respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P8 representation submitted by the petitioners within a period of four months in the light of Exts.P3 and P4. Sd/- **N.NAGARESH** **JUDGE** hmh ``` 2025:KER:30380 ``` **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ``` WP(C) NO.14317 of 2025 ``` ``` 9 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14317/2025`** ## **`PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS`** ``` Exhibit P1TRUECOPYOFTHE G.O.(P).NO.12/2019/SJDDATED 31.10.2019 Exhibit P2TRUECOPYOFTHEG.O. (MS.).NO.111/2022/GEDNDATED 25.06.2022 ``` ``` Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.SLP NO.11373/2024 DATED 04.03.2025 ``` ``` Exhibit P4TRUECOPYOFTHEG.O.(MS.) NO.43/2025/GEDN DATED 17.03.2025 Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2021 (6) KHC 59 (CENTRAL FINANCE & INVESTMENTS AND ANOTHER V. SECRETARY, KOTHAMANGNALAMMUNICIPALITYAND OTHERS) DATED 01.10.2021 ``` - **`Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 1997 KHC 114 (SOMUKUTTAN NAIR V. STATE OF KERALA) DATED 18.02.1997`** ``` Exhibit P7TRUECOPYOFTHEG.O. (MS.)NO.101/2023/GEDN DATED 18.07.2023 ``` ``` Exhibit P8TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 27.03.2025 ```