Vadakke Vettill Vijayaraghava Varrier v. State of Kerala and others

-: 1: - WP© 29802/2018 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 16TH BHADRA, 1945 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 29802 OF 2018`** ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` VADAKKE VETTIL VIJAYARAGHAVA VARRIER, S/O.LATE PADINHARE THATTIYOTTU KUNHIRAMA VARRIER, P.O.TALIPARAMBA, TALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADV A.C. VENUGOPAL ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** - `1 THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001.` - `2 THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001` - `3 THE DIRECTOR PUBLIC INFORMATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695001` - `4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001` - `5 THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER,KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001` - `6 THE ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER,TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 001` - `7 KUTTIKKOL EDUCATION SOCIETY P.O.KUTTIKKOL, TALIPARAMBA670 141 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY` - `8 PULLANHI MADHUSOODANAN,S/O. LATE PULLAHNI KUNHIRAMAN,PULLAHNI HOUSE, TRICHAMBARAM, TALIPARAMBA P.O., KANNUR DIST.( PRESIDENT OF THE SOCIETY/MANAGER OF THE SCHOOL)` - `9 ODAM VALAPPIL SREENIVASAN,S/O. KUNNOOL GOVINDAN, SRIVILA, KOOVODE, KUTTIKKOL P.O., TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR.` -: 2: - WP© 29802/2018 ``` 10 PULLAIKODY KALARIKKAL SIVADASAN, S/O. BAVUKKANDAN KELU NAMBIAR, TALIPARAMBA AMSOM, KOOVOD DESOM, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT 11 ADDL. 11 GOVINDAN NAMBIAR.T,S/O LATE PAPPINISSERY VEETTIL RAMARKUTTY NAMBIAR, SREEVALSAM, KEEZHARA, KANNAPURAM AMSOM, KEEZHARA DESOM, KANNUR TALUK. (ADDL.R11 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 07/01/2019 IN IA.NO.02/2018) ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) .. R7 to R10 T.V.GEORGE – R11 P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) S.VIBHEESHANAN K.SUDHINKUMAR S.K.ADHITHYAN SABU PULLAN K.K.CHANDRALEKHA C.LEENA K.S.SUDHA ANUPAMA JOHNY ``` ## **`OTHER PRESENT:`** ``` SHRI V VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.7.2023, THE COURT ON 7.9.2023 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` -: 3: - WP© 29802/2018 ## **JUDGMENT** (Dated this the 7[th] day of September 2023) The petitioner is the co-owner of Kuttikkol LP School. The school is situated in 1 acre and 15 cents of land in Taliparamba taluk, Kannur District. It came in existence before the commencement of Kerala Education Act and Rules. The property where the school stands originally belonged to Trichambaram Devaswom. The Kuzhikannam right held by the tenant in the said property was purchased by Padinhare Thattiyottu Kunhirama Varrier (Kunhirama Varrier) who is the father of the petitioner as per document No.1567/1933. He thereafter executed a registered deed No. 1165/1938 dated 25.7.1938 transferring his right in the land and the school building. 2/4 share was assigned to Papinissery Ramarkutty Nambiar, ¼ share to Bavukkadan Kelu Nambiar and remaining ¼ share to Chulliyottu Raman Nair. The management right and -: 4: - WP© 29802/2018 correspondence-ship right was transferred to Ramarkutty Nambiar and Raman Nair only. Thus, Ramarkutty Nambiar, Kelu Nambiar and Raman Nambiar were holding the property as co- owners. In 1939, Ramarkutty Nambiar re-assigned ½ of his 2/4 share including the right to management and correspondence-ship of the school to Kunhirama Varrier as per document No.945/1939. Thus Ramarkutty Nambiar, Kelu Nambiar, Raman Nair and Kunhirama Varrier held ¼ right in the property and building of the school. In 1941 all the co owners entered into a settlement deed No.1784/1941 dated 17.10.1941 whereby it was decided to hold the right in the 6 cents of land and the school building equally. The right in the management and correspondence was given to Raman Nair only. The right of management and correspondence-ship was kept separate and Raman Nair was holding it as an individual management right. The individual management right held by Raman Nair was assigned to Kunhirama Varrier as per deed -: 5: - WP© 29802/2018 No.1487/1950 dated 14.6.1950 and the individual management right was approved by the authorities from1950 as per MER Act and from 1.6.1959 as per KER Act and Rules. He was managing the school till his death on 6.8.1992. 2. Late Kunhirama Varrier executed a registered will No.72/1991 dated 4.12.1991 in favour of the petitioner, bequeathing his entire right in the property and the individual management and correspondence-ship to the petitioner. The DEO Kannur as per the report dated 17.6.1992 for the period 4.10.1989 to 11.12.1991, clearly stated that Kuttikkol LP school is run by individual management and is approved and acceptance by the authorities. Ext.Nos.P3 and P4 are the annual inspection reports for the period from 4.10.89 to 11.12.1991 and from 11.12.91 to 25.02.1993. After death of late Kunhirama Varrier one of the legal heirs of late Pullanhi Kunhiraman and one legal heir of late Kelu Nambiar and 2[nd] respondent tried to get the management right in their school name. Petitioner’s -: 6: - WP© 29802/2018 sister also claims that late Kunhirama Varrier had executed another registered will No.39/1992 dated 28.5.1992 in favour of her bequeathing entire right of the petitioner in the property and the individual management and correspondence-ship in her name and it was last will of the testator. While so, respondent Nos.1 and 2 approached the DDE Kannur stating that consequent to the demise of Kunhirama Varrier who was acting as the Manager for on behalf of all the co-owners of the school and all the joint owners of the property met on 7.2.1993 and decided to form an Educational society called Kuttikkol Educational Society for the management of the school. In the meeting, it was decided that the school management committee shall consist of 4 members nominated by legal heirs of the deceased co owners. The petitioner’s name is shown as the 4[th] person as the nominee of legal heir of late Kunhirama Varrier. The legal heirs of late Kunhirama Varrier were aware of the meeting and did not participate in the meeting and did not -: 7: - WP© 29802/2018 consent to the formation of the society. 3. The petitioner’s sister filed O.S.No.71 of 1996 claiming that late Kunhirama Varrier executed a registered will No.39/1992 dated 28.5.1992 in favour of her by which the entire right in the property and the individual management and correspondence-ship were given to her. The suit was dismissed on 29.10.2003 as she could not prove the will. The appeal preferred as A.S. No.7/2004 was also dismissed on 26.3.2011. Therefore the will executed in favour of the petitioner is the last will of the testator and thus, the entire right in the property including the individual management and correspondence-ship vests with the petitioner. Against the constitution of the committee, the petitioner approached this court by filing O.P.No.19551 of 2001 which was disposed of directing the 6[th] respondent to hear the petitioner and 2[nd] respondent or any affected person and to pass appropriate orders within 2 months. The 6[th] respondent conducted a hearing on 18.1.2002 and -: 8: - WP© 29802/2018 rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that O.S.No.71 of 1996 filed by the petitioner’s sister was pending before the Musniff’s court, Thaliparamba. 4. In the meanwhile the petitioner filed O.S.No.218 of 2012 before the Munsiff Court, Thaliparamba against all the legal heirs of the original property and the legal heirs of Kunnool Govindan and Pullanhi Kunhiraman. One of the prayers in the suit was to declare the decision taken by the legal committee without including the legal heirs of late Kunhirama Varrier to make Srinivasan the Manager of the school is illegal and not binding on the petitioner and seeking a mandatory injunction directing the respondent educational authority to appoint the petitioner as the individual manager of the school as per the will executed by his father retrospectively from 6.8.1992. Though an application for temporary injunction was preferred as I.A. No.356 of 2013 restraining the defendants from alienating the property including the school building and -: 9: - WP© 29802/2018 transferring the management right and restraining the defendants from making the new appointment in the school and from awarding maintenance grant to the Manager, the trial court relying on the decision of this court in **Kamalakshi Amma v. Karthiyani Amma [1999(2) KLT 552]** and Section 33 of Kerala Education Act held that the Manager cannot be restraining by means of a temporary injunction. Though an appeal was filed against I.A.No.356 of 2013 as C.M.A.No.11 of 2013, the same was also dismissed upholding the findings of the learned Munsiff. The petitioner thereafter obtained records under the Right to Information Act whether late Kunhirama Varrier was an individual Manager and under what capacity the appointments were made. 5. A specific query was also made to different authority whether Educational society is registered under the Registration Act and the reply received from the authorities shows that there are no records to prove the same. The petitioner, therefore, -: 10: - WP© 29802/2018 approached the 6[th] respondent on 4.7.2018 with a representation praying to restrain the respondents from making new appointments in the school and to withdraw the maintenance grant to the Manager appointed by the illegal society. The said representation was disposed of by Ext.P25 reply dated 8.8.2018. The petitioners approached the court with the following reliefs: i) Call for the entire records relating to the above case. ii) issue a writ of Certiorari or other appropriate writ, orders or directions calling for records of this case leading to Ext.P25 and quash the same. iii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions commanding the respondents 1 to 6 to take action against respondents 7 to 10. iv) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions commanding the respondents 1 to 6 to restrain the respondents 7 to 10 from making new appointments in the school and to withdraw awarding maintenance grant to the manager appointed by the illegal Society. v)issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions commanding the respondents 1 to 6 to take over the management of the school till the dispute is resolved. vi) issue such other and further writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper to issue in the facts and circumstances of the case.” ## 6. A counter affidavit was filed by respondent Nos.7 to 10. ## It is admitted in the counter affidavit that the property and the management of the school rest with Ramarkutty Nambiar, Kelu -: 11: - WP© 29802/2018 Nambiar, Raman Nair and Kunhirama Varrier in equal proportion as per document No 945/1939. As per Ext.P1 settlement deed Raman Nair was appointed as the Manager of the school for and on behalf of the other owners as well. So the management is a corporate management and Raman Nair was selected as Manager for and on behalf of the corporate Manager. On the death of Ramarkutty Nambir, his legal heirs transferred their ¼ right in favour of Pullanhi Kunhiraman and Raman Nair transferred his right to Kunnool Govindan, thus Kelu Nambiar, Kunhirama Varrier, Govindan and Kunhiraman became the members of the corporate management having ¼ share in the school property and management. Kunhirama Varrier was entrusted as the Manager for and on behalf of the agency. By virtue of section 3(4) of the Kerala Education Act and Rules, the school became an ‘existing school’ and the agreement executed in 1941 became the constitution of the school. There upon Kunhirama Varrier on the death of other co owners was -: 12: - WP© 29802/2018 the only remaining living member and acted as the Manager of the school until his death on 6.8.1992. The revenue authorities accepted the corporate management and issued patta in respect of the entire property in favour of all the members of the corporate management. A perusal of Ext.P2 will be executed by father of the petitioner would show that what is bequeathed is only to conduct the management of the school and not the ownership. The reason being Kunhirama Varrier was managing the school on behalf of the corporate management. All the legal heirs except the legal heirs of Kunjirama Varrier attended the meeting on 7.2.1993 and decided to approve the draft constitution for the management of the school. A legal heir of Kunjirama Varrier was also included as one of the members. The constitution was submitted before the Deputy Director of Education (DDE) for approval on 1.3.1993. The approval of the constitution was intimated by DDE to Smt.Yasoda Varasiyar who was the sister of the petitioner as per -: 13: - WP© 29802/2018 communication dated 28.10.1993. on the approval of the constitution the President of Kuttikkol education society became the Manager of the school. The appointment of the Manager was approved by the AEO Taliparamba North as per proceedings dated 2.12.1993 which is produced as Ext.R8(f). This was challenged by the sister of the petitioner before the 3[rd] respondent. The 3[rd] respondent, after hearing all the parties, dismissed the appeal by order dated 2.11.1995. The rejection order was challenged before the Government in revision which was also dismissed as per order dated 20.5.1996. It was rejected on the ground that smt Yasoda Varasiyar had already filed O.S. No.71/1996 to declare her as the Manager of the school and property and is still pending. The suit filed as O.S. No. 71/1996 was dismissed with costs. Appeal filed against the dismissal was also dismissed as per judgment dated 26.3.2011 in A.S.No.7 of 2004 of Subordinate Judges court, Payyannur. In the meanwhile, the petitioner who is the brother of Yasoda -: 14: - WP© 29802/2018 Varasiyar challenged the constitution of the committee in O.P.No.19551/2001 wherein this court by Ext.P9 judgment directed the AEO Thaliparamba to take a decision on the claim made by the petitioner. The representation was rejected stating that the petitioner’s sister has already filed O.S.71 of 1996 praying for the same relief. Another O.S.No.218/2012 was filed by the petitioner before the Munsiff’s court Thaliparamba claiming that the transfer made by Raman Nair as well as Ramar Kutty Nambiar are against 1941 settlement and also the election of the committee and appointment of Sreenivasan as Manager of the School are illegal and not binding on the petitioner. Ext.R8(k) is a letter given by the petitioner to the Secretary of the Society dated 25.11.1993 and also 16.10.1996 stating that he is not interested in participating in any meetings of the society. 7. It is true that the society is not registered under the Societies Registration Act, the constitution society was -: 15: - WP© 29802/2018 approved by the educational authorities as it satisfied the conditions prescribed under the conditions of the Kerala Education Act and Rules. There is no law which says that an Educational Society running a school should be registered under the Registration Act. 8. A reply affidavit has been filed by the petitioner controverting the allegations in the affidavit filed by respondent Nos.7 to 10. 9. A counter affidavit was filed by the 6[th] respondent also wherein in the same as that of the contentions raised by respondent Nos.7 to 10 were raised. 10. When a Manager is appointed in a school by its governing body the approval is given in accordance with Rule 4 of chapter III K.E.R. Rule 4(3) clearly states that if there are any objections in the approval of the appointment the same should be submitted to the DDE concerned within a period of one month. The petitioner has not challenged the approval in -: 16: - WP© 29802/2018 ## 1993. 11. The 7[th] respondent filed I.A.No.1 of 2021 producing Ext.R7(a) the judgment in O.S.No.218/2012 dated 22.3.2021 wherein the suit filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. Therefore, prayed that the petition may be dismissed. 12. Heard Shri Venugopal A.C. for the petitioner, learned senior counsel Shri K P Satheesan for respondent Nos.7 to 10 and the counsel Shri T V George for additional respondent No.11. 13. The main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that late paid Kunhirama Varrier was acting as an individual Manager from 1950 onwards and his right has been approved by the authorities under MER Act and Kerala Education Act and Rules till his death on 1992. Thereafter on the basis of the Will executed by the father of the petitioner as Will No.72/1991 dated 4.12.1991, the petitioner became the individual management. The constitution of Kuttikkol -: 17: - WP© 29802/2018 Educational society on the basis of the meeting held on 7.2.1993 is an illegally constituted body and the petitioner never participated in the meeting and not signed the memorandum. Therefore, it is not binding on the petitioner. Ext.Nos.P2 and P3 would show the inspection report of DDE, Kannur approves the individual Manager ship. The suit filed by the sister of petitioner as O.S.No.71/1996 based on another will executed by father of the petitioner as will No.39/1992 dated 28.5.1992 ended in dismissal and the appeal was also dismissed. Therefore the will in favour of the petitioner survives and it is the last will executed by a testator. Therefore, the petitioner should have been approved as the individual Manager of the school on the death of his father. 14. The learned senior counsel Shri K P Satheesan representing respondents 7 to 10 argues that on the death of Sri late Kunhirama Varrier, legal heirs of all the co-owners, except Kunhirama Varrier attended a meeting on 7.2.1993 and -: 18: - WP© 29802/2018 unanimously decided to approve the constitution of the management of the school and the formation of Kuttikkol Educational Society. The constitution of the committee was submitted before the Deputy Registrar for approval and on the basis of the directions of this court in O.P.No. 6970/1993, approved the constitution of the management of the school. On the basis of the approved constitution, the AEO Taliparamba approved the appointment of Manager as per order dated 2.12.1993. Smt. Yasoda Varasiyar challenged the approval of the constitution as well as the approval of the Manager before the DPI and the DPI after hearing all the parties dismissed the appeal. Though a revision was filed, Government also rejected the same. The suit by Yasoda as OS 71/1996 before the Munsiff court was also dismissed. Appeal filed was also ended in dismissal. It is after the dismissal of the suit as well as the appeal filed by the sister of the petitioner, the petitioner has now come with the same cause challenging the constitution of the -: 19: - WP© 29802/2018 committee. Through a suit was filed as O.S.No.218 of 2012, the petitioner tried to get an order of injunction and it was unsuccessful. The petitioner was aware of the constitution of the committee and its meeting even before 25.11.1993 as Ext.R8(k) proves the same. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any of the reliefs. Moreover, he submitted that the main relief that the petitioner seeks is to quash Ext.P25 and since the suit O.S.No.218 of 2012 is already dismissed, the Writ Petition itself has become infructuous. 15. The petitioner takes a claim as an individual Manager of the School on the basis of the will executed by his father. Ext.P1 is the copy of the settlement deed No.1487/1950 dated 14.6.1950 whereby the right of management and correspondence-ship was given to Kunhirama Varrier. A perusal of Ext.P1 would show that the co-owners wanted to keep the property as well as the management are in correspondence among themselves. The recital in respect of -: 20: - WP© 29802/2018 ## same is extracted below: “24.6.41 നു ്തെ തലകാല കല ്‌പന അനുസരിച്ു ന്മളിൽ 3 -ാാാ നമ്രകാരൻ ്തപരിൽത്തെ തിരി്പാൻ ഇ്ത്പാഴു നി്ᩐയിച്ിരി്ᨪുെു. 2. എൊൽ ്തെ്പടി സ്കൂൾ എടു്പി്തനയു ൊ്തനജ ്തെ്ൻി്തനയു കറസ ്പാ്ᩂ്ൻഷി ്പി്തനയു ്തെ്പടി സ്കൂൾ സ ബ്യൊയു്ᩦ െ്റു കാ്യ്ങ്തളയു സ ബ്യിച് ഒരു നി്ᩐയ ്തെയ്തു്തെ്ത്ᨪ്ᩂത െുഖ്യാെശ്യൊ്തെെു ന്മൾ്ᨪ ്താെുക്‌ യാൽ ഈ നി്ᩐയ ്രഖ് ്തെ്ⴼൊൻ കാരെൊയതാെ 3 എൊൽ പ്ടികയി്തല ്ഽലെു സ്കൂൾ എടു്പു ഉപകരെ്ങളു ന്മൾ കൂ്ടായി കയെശ് ്തെച് ന്മൾ ൊ്ഹർൊരു്തട നിലയിൽ മ്പെൃെി നടെി്ത്ᨪാ്്ᩦ്ᩂതാ്തെെു ്തെ്പടി സ്കൂൾ ൊ്നജ ്തെ്ൻു കറസ ്പാ്ᩂ്ᩂ ഷി്പു ന്മൾ നാലു ്പരു്തടയു ്പരിൽ കൂ്ടായി ്െലാൽ നിർെുെത ഡി്പാർ്ട ്തെ്ൻിൽ നിെു സ്മതി്ᨪുെ പ്ᩌ ആെശ്യൊയി െൊൽ ഈ നി്ᩐയ്രഖ് കാെിച്ു ന്മൾ ഹരജി ്ബാധി്പിച്ു നാലാളുകളു്തടയു ്പരിൽ തിരി്ത്ᨪ്ᩂതാ്തെെു ഇതിനാൽ നി്ᩐയിച്ിരി്ᨪുെു 4 ്തെൽ മ്പകാര ൊ്നജ ്തെ്ൻു കറസ ്പാ്ᩂ്ᩂ ഷി്പു ന്മൾ നാലു ്പരു്തടയു ്പരിൽ കൂ്ടായി തിരിയുെതുെ്തര ഇ്്പാൾ 3 -ാാാ ൊ്നജ ്തെ്ൻു കറസ ്പാ്ᩂ്ᩂ ഷി്പു െഹി്ᨪുെ നമ്രകാരൻ ഗെൺ്തെ്ൻിൽ നിെ ൊ്ങി െരുെ സഹായ ധനെി്ത്ൻ ബി്ലാ ്തെ്ത്ᨪാ ൊ്ങിയാൽ ്ശ്ഷ നമ്രകാ്തര കാെിച്ു ്ബാᩍ᪚യ്ത്പടുെി ൊറികി്ടുെ സ ഖ്യ ്ശ്ഷ നമ്രകാർ െുഖ്ാ്ᩌര ്ബാᩍ᪚യ്ത്പടുെി എലാെരു കൂടി സഹായ്‌ ധനെി്ത്ൻ ൊ്നജ ്തെ്ൻെകാശ്െിനു്ᩦ സ ഖ്യാ തൽ്ᩌെ നാലു സെ ഭാഗ്ങളായി ഭാഗി്തച്ടു്പാനു ബാ്ᨪി സ ഖ്യ ്തകാ്ᩂ 1 രാെൻകു്ടി നരയാർ (ഒ്പു) 2.്തകളു നരയാര (ഒ്പു) (3) രാെൻ നായർ (ഒ്പു) 4 കു്ഞിരാെൊരയർ P.K Variar സാ്ᩌികൾ 1 കു്ഞ്പ (ഒ്പു) 2 കു്ഞി ക്ᩆൻ (ഒ്പ ) ..........്ഹർൊരു്തട ്മ്ഗയ്ഡിനനുസരിച്ു ശ്രള ഭാഗി്തച്ടു്പാനു നി്ᩐയി്ᨪുകയു ൊസപടി പ്ടിക അതാത സെയ പൂർെിയാ്ᨪി അതാതെസരെു്ᩦ ്തഹഡ്മാ്ഹർൊർ സൂ്ᩌി്്ᨪ്ᩂതു ആകുെു.” ## 16. Ext.P2 is the will executed by the father of the petitioner in favour of him. The title of the property as well as the individual managership is based on Ext.P2. The father of the -: 21: - WP© 29802/2018 petitioner can only transfer what he has obtained under Ext.P1 and not more than that. When Ext.P1 specifically states that Raman Nair is made as the Manager for and on behalf of all the co-owners and the right of Raman Nair is assigned to the petitioner’s father as per document No.1487/1950, the petitioner’s father can only have the right to conduct the school as the Manager on behalf of the co-owners. The petitioner’s father till his death on 6.8.1992 was the Manager of the school in the capacity of an agent of all the co-owners and he does not have an individual manager-ship right in the school. It is also a fact that Kuttikkol Educational society was formed by the original co-owners’ legal heirs except Kunhirama Varrier’s legal heirs. The DDE approved the constitution of the management of the school and it was informed to the sister of the petitioner as per Ext.R8(e) and also the appointment of the Manager of School was approved by the AEO on 2.12.1993. The approval of the constitution of the management as well as -: 22: - WP© 29802/2018 the appointment of the President of the society as Manager of the School was challenged by the sister of the petitioner before the DPI as well as the Government and the same was dismissed. The suit filed by the sister of the petitioner also was dismissed. It is only after exhausting that all the remedies by the petitioner’s sister in respect of the challenge to the approval of the constitution of the school as well as the president of the society as the Manager of the school the petitioner put the law in motion for the same relief which is negative by the authorities as well as the competent civil court. The main reason for rejecting the petitioner’s request as per Ext.P25 is the pendency of O.S.No.218 of 2012 filed by the petitioner before the Munsiff court, Taliparamba. It is brought to the notice of this court that as per Ext.R7(a) that the original suit has been dismissed by the court on 22.3.2021. Therefore, Ext.P25 letter cannot be quashed as the issue has now become infructuous due to the dismissal of O.S.No.218 of 2012. The challenge to the -: 23: - WP© 29802/2018 constitution of the school as well as the approval of the Manager are already confirmed in appeal as well as the revision. The petitioner cannot now state a claim to be an individual Manager of the school. Since the order of approval of the Manager as well as the order of the Committee have become final and not challenged before this court, the petitioner cannot seek the reliefs sought in this Writ Petition. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs and consequently, the Writ Petition is dismissed. **Sd/-** **BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE** _dl/_ -: 24: - WP© 29802/2018 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29802/2018`** |`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`|| |---|---| |`EXHIBIT P1`|`TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.1748/1941`| ||`DATED 17.10.1941`| |`EXHIBIT P2`|`TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO.72/1991 DATED`| ||`04.12.1991`| |`EXHIBIT P3`|`TRUE COPY OF ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORT`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR THE`| ||`PERIOD 4.10.1989 TO 11.12.1991 DATED`| ||`17.06.1992`| |`EXHIBIT P4`|`TRUE COPY OF ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORT`| ||`SUBMITTED BY THE 64TH RESPONDENT FOR THE`| ||`PERIOD 11.12.1991 TO 25.02.1993 DATED`| ||`02.06.1993`| |`EXHIBIT P5`|`TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN O.P.NO.6970/1993`| ||`DATED 10.07.1993`| |`EXHIBIT P6`|`TRUE COPY OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE`| ||`EDUCATION AGENCY OF SCHOOLS PRODUCED BEFORE`| ||`THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNDER KUTTIKKOL EDUCATION`| ||`SOCIETY DATED 27.02.1992`| |`EXHIBIT P7`|`TRUE COPY OF MEMORANDUM OF ASSOCIATION DATED`| ||`27.02.1993 OF KUTTIKKOL EDUCATION SOCIETY,`| ||`KUTTIKKOL`| |`EXHIBIT P8`|`THE ORDER OF 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 28.10.1993`| |`EXHIBIT P9`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN`| ||`O.P.NO.195551/2001 DATES 22.11.2001`| |`EXHIBIT P10`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.01.2002 OF`| ||`THE 6TH RESPONDENT`| |`EXHIBIT P11`|`TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.218/2012`| |`EXHIBIT P12`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.356/2013 IN`| ||`O.S.NO.218/2012 DATED 05.08.2013`| |`EXHIBIT P13`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN C.M.A.NO.11/2013`| ||`DATED 21.03.2015`| -: 25: - WP© 29802/2018 |`EXHIBIT P14`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED`| |---|---| ||`05.08.2013`| |`EXHIBIT P15`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 18.03.2013`| |`EXHIBIT P16`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE`| ||`PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT OT INFORMATION ACT`| ||`DATED 03.02.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P17`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 21.02.2018 BY`| ||`THE 6TH RESPONDENT`| |`EXHIBIT P18`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL UNDER RIGHT TO`| ||`INFORMATION ACT DATED 08.03.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P19`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 31.03.2018 BY`| ||`THE 6TH RESPONDENT`| |`EXHIBIT P20`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION MADE BY THE`| ||`PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT`| ||`DATED 03.02.2018 BEFORE THE DISTRICT`| ||`REGISTRAR`| |`EXHIBIT P21`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY BY THE DISTRICT`| ||`REGISTRAR DATED 28.02.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P22`|`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO`| ||`INFORMATION ACT TO THE DDE, KANNUR DATED`| ||`12.03.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P23`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT`| ||`23.03.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P24`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY`| ||`THE PETITIONER TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED`| ||`04.07.2018`| |`EXHIBIT P25`|`TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 08.08.2018 BY`| ||`THE 6TH RESPONDENT`| |`RESPONDENT EXHIBITS`|| |`EXHIBIT R(8(a)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1487/1950`| ||`DATED 14-06-1950 EXECUTED BY RAMAN NAIR IN`| ||`FAVOUR OF GOVINDAN.`| -: 26: - WP© 29802/2018 |`EXHIBIT R8(b)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.1703/1950 DATED`| |---|---| ||`1-8-1950`| |`EXHIBIT R8(c)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE 'PATTA' ISSUED BY THE`| ||`SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, THALIPARAMBA DATED 20-07-`| ||`1976 IN O.A.NO,1655/1976`| |`EXHIBIT R8(e))`|`TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION GIVEN BY THE`| ||`DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR TO SMT.`| ||`YASODA VARASIYAR DATED 28-10-1993`| |`EXHIBIT R8(f)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ASSISTANT`| ||`EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THALIPARAMBA NORTH DATED`| ||`2-12-1993`| |`EXHIBIT R8(g)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR`| ||`OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DATED 2-1-1995`| |`EXHIBIT R8(g)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DIRECTOR`| ||`OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS DATED 2-11-1995`| |`EXHIBIT R8(h)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER G.O.(RT) NO.1746/96/G`| ||`EDN DATED 20-05-1996`| |`EXHIBIT R8(i)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29-10-2003 IN`| ||`O.S.NO. 71/1996 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT,`| ||`THALIPARAMBA`| |`EXHIBIT R8(j)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE`| ||`PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY`| ||`DATED 25-11-1993`| |`EXHIBIT R8(K)`|`TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN BY THE`| ||`PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY`| ||`DATED 25-11-1993.`| |`EXHIBIT R8(l)`|`I.A.FOR VACATING THE INTERIM ORDER WITH`| ||`SUPPORTING AFFIDAVIT.`|