P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
Ext.P10 order passed by the Family court, Malappuram on Ext.P8 application filed by the petitioner in O.P.(G&W) No.237 of 2014 is under challenge in this original petition. O.P.(G&W) No.237 of 2014 is a proceedings instituted by the petitioner for custody of three minor children. The petitioner is the father of the children and the respondent is their mother.
2. In O.P.(G&W) No.237 of 2014, the Family Court passed Ext.P5 order, for the interim custody/visitorial rights of the parties. Ext.P5 reads as follows :
“Petitioner/father is directed to handover interim custody of the elder child to the respondent/mother on 1st and 2nd Saturdays of every month. He shall produce the child at 9 a.m. before the Kolathur Police Station and respondent shall return back the child at 5 p.m. on 1st and 2nd Sunday to the petitioner likewise the respondent/mother is directed to handover interim custody of the two younger children to the petitioner/father on every 3rd and 4th Saturdays of every month. She shall produce the children before Kolathur Police Station at 9 a.m. and the petitioner shall return back the children at 5 p.m. on 3rd and 4th Sunday at the same spot without fail.”
O.P.(F.C.) No.536 of 2014 2 Ext.P5 arrangement has been in force for the last almost 6 months. In the course of the proceedings, the petitioner filed Ext.P8 application for modification of Ext.P5 arrangement. The case set up by the petitioner in Ext.P8 application is that the respondent used to go out of the house in the morning and come back only in the evening and therefore, she is not able to take care of the needs of the children. It is also stated by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the application that the respondent does not give any attention to the studies of the children and also to the needs of the children for their food and clothings.
3. When Ext.P8 application was taken up for hearing, in view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application, the learned Family Court interacted with the children and found that the second child Ajmal Fayis prefers to be with his father. Nevertheless, the learned Family Court took the view that his predecessor would have certainly ascertained the preferences of the children before passing Ext.P5 order and since there is nothing on record to support the case of the petitioner that the respondent is not giving proper care and attention to the welfare of the minors, there is no need for any change in the arrangement made as per Ext.P5 order. It was, however, made clear that the present arrangement shall continue till the beginning of the next O.P.(F.C.) No.536 of 2014 3 academic year, indicating thereby that a fresh arrangement can be made for the next academic year, if so warrants.
4. It is not disputed that if the arrangement is disturbed at this point of time, the children will have to change their schools and the change of schools during the midst of the academic year would be detrimental to the welfare of the children. In the aforesaid circumstances, we find no justification for interfering with the impugned order and the original petition is, accordingly, dismissed. However, it is made clear that the petitioner can move the Family court for appropriate modification as regards the interim arrangement for the next academic year, if so warrants.
Sd/-
V.K.MOHANAN, Judge.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, Judge.
ami/ //True copy// P.A.to Judge