SABITHA Vs. SATHEESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise from the common judgment in WP(C)No.24498 of 2017, 21246 of 2016 and 37814 of 2015, whereby the learned Single Judge relegated the dispute among the legal heirs regarding the right to manage two institutions by name Sree Narayana Teachers Institute, Nileshwar and 'Sree Narayana Aided U.P.School', Padannakad (hereinafter referred to as 'the schools' for short) to the Educational Authority for appropriate decisions regarding the membership in terms of the Kerala Education Act and Rules. The material facts require for deciding the appeals are as follows:-

(2.) On 2/9/2013 Sabitha K.V staked her claim for managership by letter dtd. 2/9/2013, while Satheesan K.V. with the support of the remaining legal heirs successfully made a claim on 4/10/2013 and was appointed as Manager by Ext.P3 order on 11/10/2013 by the 4th respondent and which was approved by the DPI by Ext.P4 order on 31/10/2013. Sabitha.K.V. appealed against Exts.P3 and P4 orders, which was disposed of by Ext.P5 holding that the Will set up by her cannot be accepted and that a scheme has to be framed being a corporate educational agency, within a period of six months. Thereafter, there were exchange of letters between both the parties and ultimately by Ext.P13, the Government by order dtd. 16/10/2015 appointed Satheesan.K.V. as the Manager again with a condition that no appointment shall be made as the byelaw has to be with the junction of all the legal heirs. Consequential order was passed by the DEO on 12/11/2015 by Ext.P14. These orders, Exts.P13 and P14 were challenged by Sabitha.K.V. by filing WP(C)No.37814 of 2015. No interim order was granted in the said writ petition. Satheesan.K.V. on the other hand filed WP(C)No.21246 of 2016 challenging the restrictions placed in Exts.P13 and P14 on him while acting as Manager. Later, by Ext.P23 order dtd. 17/7/2021 the Government appointed the Deputy Director of Education as the Manager till the resolution of disputes among the legal heirs. The said order was challenged by Satheesan.K.V. in WP(C)No.24498 of 2017. The learned Single Judge by the common judgment under appeal in the three writ petitions mentioned above directed the Deputy Director of Education, Kasargode, the 4th respondent herein to call for a meeting of all the members of the corporate educational agency and also to grant an opportunity to Sabitha K.V., the appellant herein to raise objections to the byeleaw framed by Satheesan.K.V and five other siblings, and also to give the appellant an opportunity of producing an independent byelaw of her own and then to take a decision on approving the final byelaw for the management of the schools in terms of the applicable provisions of the Act and the KER. Till such a decision was taken, Ext.P23 order by which the 4th respondent was appointed a the Manager by the order of the Government was allowed to remain in force.

(3.) Heard Sri.N.Sugunapalan, the learned senior counsel for the appellants, duly instructed by Adv.Mahesh V. Ramakrishnan, Sri.Jaju Babu, the learned Senior counsel, instructed by Adv.T.K.Vipindas appearing for the first respondent and the learned Government Pleader for the official respondents.