RAJAMANI Vs. UNNIKRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, Emmad Upper Primary School belonged to one Kumara Menon. His brother, Unnikrishnan who had only a life interest in the property, was appointed as its Manager. It is the case of the petitioner that as per a Will executed by the late Kumara Menon, the School and its property were bequeathed to Unnikrishnan, husband of the petitioner on whose death in the year, 2006 the petitioner succeeded to the estate of the said Unnikrishnan. The petitioner filed O.S.No.127 of 2011 in the Sub Court, Irinjalakuda (Ext.P1 is the copy of plaint) for a declaration of the title she claims as per the said Will and for other reliefs. Kumara Menon died on 08.03.2013. After the death of Kumara Menon, petitioner has preferred Ext.P2, before the Deputy Director of Education claiming to be appointed as Manager of the School. In the meantime the 1st respondent is taking hasty steps to appoint staff in the School. Petitioner moved an application for injunction in O.S. No.127 of 2011 to restrain the 1st respondent from making any such appointment. That application was dismissed by the learned Sub Judge for the reason that under Section 33 of the Kerala Education Act, no such temporary injunction could be granted. Hence this Writ Petition praying for a direction to the 1st respondent not to make any appointment in the School till O.S.No.127 of 2011 is decided.

(2.) THE 1st respondent in his counter affidavit has denied the averments in the petition and claimed that he was appointed as Manager as per Ext.R1(a). Learned counsel for the 1st respondent contends that so far as the 1st respondent continues as Manager approved by the appropriate authority, he is entitled to effect appointment as the Act and the Rules permits and that there could not be any restraint on that power. He has also raised an apprehension that if this Court were to restrain the 1st respondent from making any appointment, it will create difficult situation since it may take a few years for a final decision in O.S. No.127 of 2011, the appeal and second appeal arising therefrom and possibly an appeal in the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition. It is submitted that if such an order is passed, functioning of the School will come to stand still.

(3.) IT is seen from Ext.R1(a), order No.K.Dis.D/887/06 dated 25.03.2006 of the Assistant Educational Officer that on a request from Kumara Menon and the 1st respondent, the AEO has given approval for transfer of managership of the School. Exhibit R1(a) stands even now. Therefore until civil court decides the matter (if that arises for a decision in the court) or until otherwise interfered by the appropriate authority, Ext.R1(a) should stand. I am inclined to think that no interim order restraining the 1st respondent from exercising his power as Manager and appointment to the various vacancies need be granted. Any such order will affect functioning of the School since a final decision in O.S. No.127 of 2011 may come only a couple of years later. Therefore I do not consider it necessary, proper or appropriate nor permissible to grant the reliefs prayed for in the Writ Petition.