A common issue arises in these writ petitions. They were therefore heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 is treated as the main case. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 was appointed as Manager of St.Johns Syrian Higher Secondary School & Teachers Training Institute, Vatakara (Ernakulam District) by the fourth respondent Corporate Educational Agency for a period of three years with effect from 5.12.2005. The said appointment was approved by the District Educational Officer, Moovattupuzha. He was again appointed as the Manager for a further period of three years from 5.12.2008. The said appointment was also approved. Later, he was re- appointed as the Manager with effect from 5.12.2011. The said appointment was approved by the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha by Order No.B4-6323/2011 dated 5.1.2012. The fifth respondent in W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 (the seventh respondent in W.P.(C) No.13976 of 2014) who was put forward as the Manager of the school by a rival faction, thereupon moved the Government by submitting a representation dated 6.1.2012. On that representation the Government passed an interim order and directed that the operation of the order passed by the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha approving the petitioner's appointment as Manager with effect from 5.12.2012 be kept in abeyance. That order was communicated to the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha by letter No.1444/F3/2012/G.Edn dated 11.1.2012. Later, the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha rejected the proposal submitted by rival faction to approve the fifth respondent as Manager.
3. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Government, staying the operation of the order passed by the District Educational Officer approving his appointment, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 and the Educational Agency jointly filed W.P.(C) No.1633 of 2012 in this Court. In that writ petition, an interim order was passed on 20.1.2012 staying the order of stay passed by the Government. With the result, the petitioner herein continued to function as Manager of St.Johns Syrian Higher Secondary School & Teachers Training Institute, Vatakara (Ernakulm District). W.P.(C) No.1633 of 2012 was heard and disposed of by judgment delivered on 14.2.2012 with a direction to the Government to pass final orders on the representation dated 6.1.2012 filed by the fifth respondent. Pursuant thereto, the Government passed Ext.P1 order dated 24.8.2012 whereby the Government directed that the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha shall hold charge of the Manager till the managing committee elects a new Manager in terms of the bye-laws.
4. The educational agency and the petitioner herein thereupon filed W.P.(C) No.20652 of 2012 in this Court challenging Ext.P1 Government order, which was produced and marked as Ext.P13 in that writ petition. W.P.(C) No.20652 of 2012 was heard and allowed by Ext.P2 judgment delivered on 30.1.2013 and the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha was directed to hand over charge of the Manager of the educational institutions to the petitioner herein who was the second petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20652 of 2012. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court that a petition filed by Smt. Bindumol P. Abraham, High School Assistant of the school before the Director of Public Instruction wherein she had sought disqualification of the petitioner, is pending before the Director of Public Instruction. In view of that fact, even while allowing W.P.(C) No.20652 of 2012 and directing the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha to hand over charge to the petitioner herein, this Court observed that the judgment of this Court will not preclude the Director of Public Instruction from completing the proceedings initiated by him in terms of rule 7 of Chapter III of the Kerala Education Rules.
5. The fifth respondent herein unsuccessfully challenged Ext.P2 judgment by filing W.A.No.358 of 2013 which was dismissed by Ext.P3 judgment delivered on 7.3.2013. Pursuant thereto, the Additional Director of Public Instruction issued order No.K.Dis/EC(3)/ 34651/2012/DPI dated 27.5.2013 and K.Dis/EC(3)/34651/2012/DPI/L dated 27.5.2013 whereby he disqualified the petitioner. The petitioner thereupon filed W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013 in this Court challenging the said orders which were produced and marked as Ext.P8 and P8(a) respectively therein. While the said writ petition was pending, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.13976 of 2014 got himself impleaded as the additional eighth respondent in W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013. W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013 was heard and allowed by Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 3.12.2013. By that judgment, the orders passed by the Additional Director of Public Instruction were set aside and the Director of Public Instruction was directed to reconsider the matter in the light of the earlier judgments of this Court. This Court also directed that all the parties concerned shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard.
6. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 3.12.2013 in W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013, the Additional Director of Public Instruction on behalf of the Director of Public Instruction issued Ext.P5 notice, dated 20.3.2014 to the petitioner and others inviting them to be present for a personal hearing at 3 PM on 28.3.2013 in the chamber of the Director of Public Instruction. Notice was however not issued to the educational agency. Upon receipt of Ext.P5 notice the petitioner appeared before the Director of Public Instruction on 28.3.2014 and submitted Ext.P6 representation. The Director of Public Instruction did not however pass final orders. The then Director of Public Instruction demitted office and another person was appointed as Director of Public Instruction. In the meanwhile, the educational agency moved this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.9650 of 2014 complaining that notice was not issued to it before the complaint filed by the teacher seeking disqualification of the petitioner was taken up for consideration on 28.3.2014. The said writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P7 judgment delivered on 7.4.2014 with a direction to the Director of Public Instruction to issue notice to the corporate educational agency as well before finalizing the matter.
This Court also directed that a final decision in matter shall be taken expeditiously and at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. Pursuant thereto, the Director of Public Instruction issued Ext.P8 notice dated 7.5.2014 to the educational agency represented by the Vicar of the Church as also to the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha inviting them to be present for a personal hearing at 3 PM on 13.5.2014 in the chamber of the Director of Public Instruction. Notice was however not issued to the petitioner. The petitioner thereupon sent Ext.P9 representation dated 8.5.2014 by registered post to the Director of Public Instruction requesting that he may also be heard in the matter. W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 was thereafter filed on 12.5.2014 seeking the following reliefs:
i. issue a writ or mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 1st respondent to hear the petitioner and all other concerned before taking a decision pursuant to show cause notice dated 29.5.2012 issued against the petitioner.
ii. direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on ext.P9 before passing any orders pursuant to the hearing scheduled on 13.5.2014.
iii. Direct the 1st respondent not to pass any orders pursuant to the hearing scheduled to be conducted on 13.5.2014 without affording an effective opportunity to the petitioner and others concerned as directed in Exts.P2 to P4 judgments.
7. The main contention raised in the writ petition is that as the Manager who is sought to be disqualified, the petitioner has a right to be heard in the matter. The petitioner has averred that the Director of Public Instruction who was in office on 28.3.2014 did not hear the petitioner, that he had only called upon the petitioner to submit notes of arguments, that it was submitted, that the then Director of Public Instruction is no longer in office and that the hearing which is proposed to be held on 13.5.2014 is by a different officer.
8. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.13976 of 2014 is the President of the Parent Teachers Association of St.John's Syrian Higher Secondary School and Teachers Training Institute. The relief sought in W.P.(C) No.13976 of 2014 is for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the Director of Public Instruction to issue notice to the petitioner therein and other concerned parties before passing orders pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in the judgment delivered on 3.12.2013 in W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013 (Ext.P4 in W.P.
(C) No.12383 of 2014). The petitioner contends that in view of the direction issued by this Court in the said judgment to which he was also a party, he is entitled to be heard in the matter.
9. When these writ petitions came up for hearing today, Smt.A.Lowsy, learned Government Pleader appearing for the State of Kerala submitted that the hearing which was scheduled to be held on 13.5.2014 was postponed. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that in view of the interim order passed by this Court on 16.5.2014 to the effect that final orders shall not be passed without hearing the petitioner if as on that day orders have not been passed pursuant to Ext.P8, the Director of Public Instruction has not yet passed orders in the matter. It is now not in dispute that the Director of Public Instruction is yet to take a final decision pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 3.12.2013 in W.P.(C) No.13596 of 2013. This Court had by the said judgment directed that all the parties concerned shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard. As the person who is sought to be disqualified, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 will therefore necessarily have to be heard. The teacher who had invoked the jurisdiction of the Director of Public Instruction will also have to be heard. In view of the directions of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment the educational agency also will have to be heard. Needless to say the District Educational Officer as also the President of the Parent Teacher Association will also have had to be heard in view of the directions in Ext.P4 judgment. Such being the situation, I am of the opinion that the Director of Public Instruction should issue notice to all the parties concerned, thereby giving no one a reason to complain about his action. It appears those concerned with the drawing up of the notice of hearing (in the office of the Director of Public Instruction) are either deliberately not issuing the notice to all concerned so as to enable the party aggrieved by the final order to successfully challenge the order of the Director of Public Instruction on the ground that they had not been put on notice and heard or to stall timely consideration of the complaint filed by a teacher to disqualify the Manager. I hope and trust that at least on this occasion the Director of Public Instruction will take care to ensure that the notice of hearing is issued to all the parties concerned. In the view that I have taken I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with the following directions:
a. The Director of Public Instruction shall, as directed by this Court in Ext.P4 judgment delivered on 3.12.2013 issue notice to the complainant before him, the educational agency concerned, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12383 of 2014 (Manager who is sought to be disqualified), the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.13976 of 2014 (President of the Parent Teachers Association) and the District Educational Officer, Muvattupuzha and pass final orders on the petition to disqualify the Manager, expeditiously and in any event within an outer limit of two months from the date on which either of the parties produce a copy of this judgment before him.
b. The Director of Public Instruction shall ensure that at least two weeks notice is given to all the parties concerned and that the notice of hearing is issued simultaneously to all the parties.
c. The Director of Public Instruction shall after orders are passed ensure that the orders are simultaneously communicated to all the parties.
rkc.
Sd/-
P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.