W.P.(C) Nos. 10792 of 2016; 19201 of 2016 (St. John’s Syrian Higher Secondary School & Teachers Training Institute, Vadakara vs. Secretary, General Education Department; and Fr. Joy Kadukummakkil, Vicar of St. John's Orthodox Syrian Church, Vadakara)

``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ``` PRESENT ``` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945 ``` ``` W.P.(C) NO.10792 OF 2016 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` THE MANAGER,(NOW DISQUALIFIED UNDER EXHIBIT P10 ORDER), ST.JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL & TEACHERS TRAINING INSTITUTEC, VADAKARA, OLIYAPURAM P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM - 686 662. ``` ``` BY ADV SRI.JAMES ABRAHAM (VILAYAKATTU) ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, OFFICE OF DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014. 3THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 661. ADDL.R4FR.ELIAS JACOB CHERUKATTU, CHAIRMAN, SCHOOL BOARD, ST.JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND TEACHER'S TRAINING INSTITUTE, VADAKARA. (ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 07.10.2016 IN I.A.NO.12442/2016) BY ADVS. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.FAISAL K.M. SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY SMT.CHINCY GOPAKUMAR SRI.T.C.KRISHNA SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN GP-FAISAL K.M. ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.08.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).19201/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ ``` IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM ``` ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI ``` ``` MONDAY, THE 14[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1945 ``` ``` W.P.(C) NO.19201 OF 2016 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` FR. JOY KADUKUMMAKKIL, AGED 57 YEARS, THE VICAR, ST. JOHN'S ORTHODOX SYRIAN CHURCH, VADAKARA. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SRI.B.PRAMOD SRI. MATHEW .P.V ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, OFFICE OF DIRECTORATE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014. 3THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661. 4THOMSON C. VARGHESE, THE MANAGER (NOW UNDER DISQUALIFICATION), ST. JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ST. JOHN'S SYRIAN BASIC TRAINING SCHOOL (TTI), VADAKARA, OLIYAPURAM P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM, ERNAKULAM-686 662. 5SCHOOL MANAGING BOARD OF ST.JOHN’S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ST.JOHN’S SYRIAN BASIC TRAINING SCHOOL (TTC), REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, FR. ALIAS JACOB CHERUKATTU-686 662. ``` ``` BY ADVS. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.V.K.SUNIL SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY SRI.T.C.KRISHNA SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.08.2023, ALONG WITH WP(C).10792/2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 3 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ ## JUDGMENT ( _Dated: 14[th] August, 2023)_ W.P.(C)No.10792 of 2016 is filed by the manager of St.John’s Syrian Higher Secondary School and Teachers Training Institute, Vadakara, challenging Ext.P10, whereby the manager has been declared as unfit to hold the office of the above school or in any other aided school in the State. W.P.(C)No.19201 of 2016 is filed by the Vicar of St.John’s Orthodox Syrian Church, Vadakara, challenging the very same order, which is challenged in W.P.(C)No.10792 of 2016 and to permit the petitioner to make the admission of students to the education institution in question under the management as well as the community quota. Since the question involved is, the validity of the order passed by the DPI in both cases, they are heard together, and a common judgment is passed. Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the case are as follows: 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.10792 of 2016 was appointed as 4 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ manager of the school for a period of three years from 05.12.2005 and it was subsequently extended from time to time. Another faction challenged the petitioner’s appointment as manager from 05.12.2005 by filing W.P.(C)No.14256 of 2007 but the same was dismissed. Though W.A.No.2515 of 2007 was filed against the dismissal of W.P.(C)No.14256 of 2007, the same also ended in dismissal. Still aggrieved, an SLP was filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and it also ended in dismissal. When the petitioner was appointed for another period of three years from 05.12.2008, the same was also challenged but negatived by this Court. Thereafter from 2012 onwards, the petitioner was still appointed and was approved. During this time, the opposite faction submitted a proposal to appoint another person as manager and it was rejected by the 3[rd] respondent. A representation was filed before the 1[st] respondent and the 1[st] respondent passed an order against the approval of the petitioner as manager. That order was challenged in W.P.(C)No.1633 of 2012 and it was disposed of directing the 1[st] respondent to consider the issue and the 1[st] respondent in obedience to 5 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ the directions issued by this Court passed an order invoking power under Rule 3 of Chapter I of Kerala Education Rules and authorize DEO, Muvattupuzha, to hold the charge of the manager of the school as an interim arrangement till the managing committee elects a new manager as per the provisions in the bylaw. 3. W.P.(C)No.20652 of 2012 was filed by the petitioner and this Court quashed the order passed by the 1[st] respondent and directed the 3[rd] respondent to hand over the charge of the manager to the petitioner. Though a writ appeal was filed as W.A.No.358 of 2013, it also ended in dismissal. While so, in the year 2011, the 1[st] respondent issued a communication as Ext.P3 to the Joint Director of Public Instruction by the name Smt.V.K.Saralamma, to conduct an enquiry into the functioning of the school, bogus admission if any, and infrastructure facilities of the school on the basis of a submission made by one Smt.Bindumol P.Abraham, who was suspended by the petitioner. Pursuant to the report, the 1[st] respondent issued an administrative instruction to the 2[nd] respondent to take action against 6 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ the petitioner under Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER without hearing the petitioner. 4. In the meanwhile Smt.V.K.Saralamma, who had conducted the enquiry was promoted to Additional Director of Public Instructions (General), and by the time Ext.P4 was issued, the said Saralamma was in the chair of Additional Director of Public Instructions and she passed Ext.P5 disqualifying the petitioner. Ext.P5 was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.13596 of 2013 and this Hon’ble Court set aside Ext.P5 and directed the 2[nd] respondent to reconsider the issue in the light of Exts.P1 and P2 judgments. The 2[nd] respondent thereafter passed an order directing the Deputy Director of Education to disqualify the petitioner under Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER. This was again challenged in W.P.(C)No.25577 of 2014 and another writ petition filed by the owner of the school as W.P.(C)No.25643 of 2014 and by a common judgment the order under challenge was set aside and directed the 2[nd] respondent either to conclude the process he had initiated under Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER by pronouncing orders finally on the issue of disqualification of 7 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ the petitioner or else to delegate the entire power to the Deputy Director of Education concerned, whichever is desirable. 5. Inspite of the specific direction in Ext.P7 judgment, the Deputy Director of Education passed an order disqualifying the petitioner which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.(C)No.28737 of 2014, and during the pendency of the writ petition, the order was recalled and therefore the writ petition was closed. In pursuant to the administrative instruction issued by the 1[st] respondent based on an enquiry report of Smt.V.K.Saralamma, the 2[nd] respondent passed Ext.P10 order dated 14.12.2015 declaring that the petitioner is unfit to hold the office of the manager in the school or in any other aided school in the State. 6. Against Ext.P10 order dated 14.12.2015, the petitioner has filed Ext.P11 review petition before the 1[st] respondent. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for the following reliefs. _i. Issue a writ of certiorari leading to the issuance of Exhibits P10 and quash the same._ _ii. Issue a writ of certiorari by quashing Exhibit P4._ _iii. Call for the record leading to the issuance of Exhibit P4 and P10 by the issuing writ of certiorari._ 8 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ _iv. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate order or direction directing the respondents to hand over the charge of school to the petitioner._ _v. Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate order or direction directing the 1[st] respondent to pass an order on Exhibit P11 petition within a short time frame after hearing the petitioner. vi. Grant such other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit proper considering the facts and circumstances of the case and vii. Grant the costs of this writ petition._ 7. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2[nd] respondent in which it is contended that the petitioner was appointed as manager of St.John’s Syrian Higher Secondary School, Vadakara, for a period of three years from 05.12.2005 and subsequently extended. When the petitioner’s appointment was approved on 05.12.2011, the same was challenged before the Government and the Government kept the order in abeyance. This was challenged before this Court in W.P.(C)No.1633 of 2012, which was disposed of directing the Government to pass appropriate orders. The government considered the matter and issued an order dated 24.08.2012 whereby it was ordered that the question regarding the election of the managing committee is outside the purview of the education authority to consider, and it is for the Civil Court to decide. Thereupon, the 3[rd] respondent was given the charge to act as 9 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ an interim manager until the managing committee elects a new manager. The said order was challenged in W.P.(C)No.20652 of 2012 and this Court quashed the order and directed the 2[nd] respondent to complete the proceedings with due notice to the parties. The writ appeal filed was also dismissed. 8. There were several allegations against the petitioner as the manager of St.John’s Syrian Higher Secondary School. Therefore, the Government sought fit to enquire into the allegation against the manager, and accordingly Smt. V.K.Saralamma, Joint Director was directed to conduct an enquiry and during the enquiry, it was found that the allegation raised against the petitioner was proved beyond doubt, the enquiry report was forwarded to the Government and the Government directed the 2[nd] respondent to initiate disciplinary action against the delinquent manager. 9. Ext.P10 orders issued under Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER for initiating disciplinary action against the petitioner on mismanagement of the school, denial of promotion to the senior most rightful claimant, and 10 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ bogus admissions. It is after the allegations against the petitioner stood proven, Ext.P10 order was passed declaring him unfit to hold the post as manager and directed the Educational Agency to appoint a new manager in the school as per the bylaw and the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha, was given charge as the manager of the school. Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER invokes proof of charges leveled against the petitioner. The 1[st] respondent categorically found that the action of the petitioner in the school administration was improper. Therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the writ petition. 10. It can be seen that right from 2005 onwards the petitioner’s appointment was challenged before this Court. Various orders passed by the authorities disqualifying him as a manager have been set aside on different grounds and ultimately this Court in Ext.P9 judgment in W.P.(C)No.26051 of 2015 directed the 2[nd] respondent to furnish all the documents relied on by the 2[nd] respondent and complete the proceedings after hearing the petitioner within two months. It is in compliance with the directions in the said judgment that Ext.P10 is 11 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ passed. It can be seen from Ext.P10 that the copies of the documents sought by the petitioner were given to the petitioner and after hearing the petitioner Ext.P10 was passed. The allegations raised against the petitioner are as follows: i) The petitioner has not kept the school building and the premises in good condition and necessary furniture has not been made available to the school including the fitness certificate issued by the Public Works Department, ii) non-sanctioning of annual increments of the staff of the school and undue delay in declaring probation of staff, iii) the mental torture and harassment, the teachers had to face from the petitioner. 11. In Ext.P10, the letter dated 25.05.2012 sent by the teachers of the school to the petitioner is extracted. A perusal of the same would show that the teachers have complained that the manager is not taking steps to complete the school maintenance as well as the transportation facilities to bring the children to the school from different parts is not taken care of. The 2[nd] respondent relies on a letter dated 10.01.2014 produced by the petitioner/manager himself, wherein it has been clearly 12 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ stated that he has made every effort to maintain the division strength by bringing students from far away places so that the loss of employment of teachers is prevented. The enquiry conducted by the Deputy Director also states that the petitioner has given bogus admissions to maintain the staff strength. So, it is proved beyond doubt that there was mismanagement, malpractice, and gross negligence of duty, and therefore the 2[nd] respondent is justified in invoking Rule 7 of Chapter III of KER. Though the petitioner has denied the allegations, it is not controverted by records to deny the charges levelled against him. Though the petitioner files Ext.P11 against Ext.P10 for a review of the order, the said authority does not have the power to review its own order. Therefore, there is no merit in the contention that the 2[nd] respondent has not passed orders in Ext.P11. Once the 2[nd] respondent finds that there has been mismanagement or malpractice like giving bogus admissions to the students to maintain the staff strength, the 2[nd] respondent has to take action against the manager or the education agency under Rule 7 of 13 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ Chapter III of KER. So, the reading of Ext.P10, I am of the considered opinion that the malpractice as well as the mismanagement has been proved against the petitioner and therefore the 2[nd] respondent is fully justified in declaring that the petitioner is unfit to hold the post of manager in any other aided school in the State. Moreover, the 2[nd] respondent has directed the education agency to appoint a new manager in the place of the petitioner as per the bylaws, and as an interim measure, the District Education Officer was directed to act as a manager. I do not find any grounds to interfere with the order passed by the 2[nd] respondent. Therefore, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. Since the challenge in W.P.(C)No.19201 of 2016 is also in Ext.P2 order of the 2[nd] respondent and since I have upheld Ext.P10 in W.P.(C)No.10792 of 2016, this writ petition also stands dismissed. _Sd/-_ BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE ss 14 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10792/2016`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` ``` EXT.P1: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.1.2013 IN W.P.NO.20652/2012. EXT.P2: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 7.3.2013 IN W.A.NO.358/2013. EXT.P3: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.18972/A2/2011/G.EDN. DATED 6.8.2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4: A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.18972/A2/2011/G.EDN. DATED 12.3.2012 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.K.DIS./EC(3)/34651/2012/DPI/L.DIS. DATED 27.5.2013. EXT.P6: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3.12.2013 IN W.P.NO.13596/2013. EXT.P7: A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUGMENT DATED 8.10.2014 IN W.P.NOS.25577/2014 AND 25643/2014. EXT.P8: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.11.2014 IN W.P.NO.28737/2014. EXT.P9: A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.8.2015 IN W.P.NO.26051/2015. EXT.P10: A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EC(3)/82278/2014/DPI/D.DIS. DATED 14.12.2015 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P11: A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22.12.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: A TRUE COPY OF THE FITNESS CERTIFICATES FROM THE YEAR 2010 TO 2016. ``` 15 _W.P.(C) Nos.10792 & 19201/2016_ ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19201/2016`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS: ``` ``` EXHIBIT P1:TRUE COPY OF THE BYE LAWS OF ST. JOHN'S SYRIAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL AND ST. JOHN'S SYRIAN BASIC TRAINING SCHOOL (A TTI). EXHIBIT P2:TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF DISQUALIFICATION PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. ``` ``` EXHIBIT P3: ``` ``` TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 30.5.2016. ```