The main legal point established in the judgment is the Manager's right to close down the aided school after complying with the notice requirements under the Kerala Education Act, and the conflict between the provisions of the Kerala Rules, 2011 and the RTE Act.

Antony Dominic, J.

W.A.Nos.1115/15 and 1118/15 are filed by the respondents in W.P(C).Nos.13933/15 and 4254/13 respectively. W.A.No.1583/15 is filed by the Parent Teachers Association of Thiruvannur Palat Aided Upper Primary School, Kozhikode, after obtaining leave from this Court, challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge in W.P(C).4254/13. W.A.No.1243/15 is filed by the petitioners in W.P(C).12205/15 and W.A.1262/15 is filed by the third respondent in W.P (C).12873/15. W.P(C).13933/15 is filed by the Manager, AUP School, Palat. Interim orders in that writ petition are challenged by the State in W.A.1115/15 mentioned above.

2. W.A.Nos.1115/15, 1118/15 and 1583/15 and W.P(C). 13933/15 are in relation to the issue of closure of the AUP School, palat, Thiruvannur, Kozhikode district. The issue raised in W.A.Nos.1243/15 and 1262/15 is in relation to the closure of PMLP School, Kiralur, Velur, Thrissur district.

3. The facts of the case in W.A.Nos.1115/15, 1118/15 and 1583/15 and W.P(C).13933/15 are as follows: AUP School, Palat is an Aided UP School which was established in the year 1954. It is stated that the present Manager purchased the school in the year 2006 and the change of management was approved by the Assistant Educational officer (AEO) by his order dated 10.9.2007. It is also stated that on 19.10.2007, the Manager issued notice under section 7 (6) of the Kerala Education Act, conveying his intention to close down the school.

4. Subsequently, the Manager filed W.P(C).16060/11 before this Court, which was disposed of directing the Director of Public Instructions (DPI) to communicate the decision to the Manager, on the application made by him. Accordingly, the DPI issued order dated 3.2.2012, rejecting the request of the Manager for closure of the school. Revision filed by the Manager before the Government against the order of the DPI was also rejected by order dated 29.12.2012. Thereupon, the Manager filed W.P(C). 4254/13 before this Court and that writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 19.1.2015.

5. In the judgment W.P(C).4254/13, following the judgments of this Court in Gopinathan v. State of Kerala [2001 (3) KLT 472], Balakrishnan v. Ramaeshan [1993 (1) KLT 519], Krishnakumar v. State of Kerala [1972 KLT 496], Subramanian v. State of Kerala [1986 KLT 359] and the Full Bench judgment in W.A.No.653/11 (State of Kerala v. T.P.Muneera), the learned single Judge declared that the Manager has every right to close down the school in view of the notice issued by him on 19.10.2007. It was also ordered that the respondents therein (appellants in W.A.1118/15) shall do the needful to enable the Manager to close down the school.

6. Though the judgment W.P(C).4254/13 was rendered as early as on 19.1.2015, the appellants in W.A.1118/15 did not take any further action and in such circumstances, the Manager again approached this Court by filing W.P(C).13933/15, where, he prayed for directing the AEO to comply with the provisions of Chapter V Rule 25 of Kerala Education Rules, 1959 (KER) to take over all assets, records etc related to the management of the school on proper acknowledgement in terms of section 7(7) of the Kerala Education Act, 1958 (KE Act) and to comply with the directions in the judgment in W.P(C). 4254/13.

7. When W.P(C).13933/15 came up for consideration on 8.5.2015, while admitting the case, this Court passed an interim order directing the AEO to accept the records and accounts of the school. The case again came up before this Court on 28.5.2015, when the 4th respondent AEO was ordered to be present before this Court on 1.6.2015. This was on account of the complaint that the order dated 8.5.2015 mentioned above was not complied with. Accordingly, the 4th respondent appeared before this Court on 1.6.2015 when the following order was passed:

"Pursuant to my order dated 28.05.2015, the officer holding charge as the 4th respondent is present in Court today. When queried on the date on which she wou