1. Writ appeal by third parties challenging judgment directing municipality approval for co-education introduction, raising maintainability and procedural issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 65451
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Anil K. Narendran, Muralee Krishna S., JJ
K. A Muhammed Ashraf – Appellant
Versus
Muslim Girls’ Higher Secondary School – Respondent
WA NO. 1118 OF 2026
Important Points
A writ petition involving complex statutory interpretations and affecting third parties should not be disposed of at the admission stage without counter-affidavits, especially when previous litigation on the same subject exists and necessary parties are not impleaded.
Subject
Education Law - School Administration
Act Referred
Headnote
(A) Education Law - Co-education - Procedure for conversion of girls-only school to mixed school - Requirement of local body approval under government circular vs. statutory rules under Kerala Education Rules (KER). (Para 4, 15)
(B) Civil Procedure - Constructive Res Judicata - Filing of subsequent writ petition on the same subject matter after a previous petition was disposed of with directions - Maintainability of subsequent petition. (Para 7, 14)
(C) Procedural Fairness - Disposal of Writ Petition - Decision at admission stage without counter-affidavits or hearing respondents - Error in law when complex factual and legal issues are involved. (Para 14)
(D) Necessary Parties - Impleadment - Teachers of nearby schools affected by the introduction of co-education in a rival school are necessary parties to the proceedings. (Para 10)
Issues: Whether the Single Judge was justified in granting approval for co-education at the admission stage without considering the statutory provisions of KER and the rights of affected third parties.
Result: Impugned judgment set aside; writ petition restored for reconsideration on merits.
(B) Civil Procedure - Constructive Res Judicata - Filing of subsequent writ petition on the same subject matter after a previous petition was disposed of with directions - Maintainability of subsequent petition. (Para 7, 14)
(C) Procedural Fairness - Disposal of Writ Petition - Decision at admission stage without counter-affidavits or hearing respondents - Error in law when complex factual and legal issues are involved. (Para 14)
(D) Necessary Parties - Impleadment - Teachers of nearby schools affected by the introduction of co-education in a rival school are necessary parties to the proceedings. (Para 10)
Issues: Whether the Single Judge was justified in granting approval for co-education at the admission stage without considering the statutory provisions of KER and the rights of affected third parties.
Result: Impugned judgment set aside; writ petition restored for reconsideration on merits.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.A. Manzoor Ali, George Abraham
For the Respondents: M. Ajay, Sunil V. Mohammed, Nisha George, A.L. Navaneeth Krishnan, George Poonthottam (Sr.), Reeha Khader K.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.A. Manzoor Ali, George Abraham
For the Respondents: M. Ajay, Sunil V. Mohammed, Nisha George, A.L. Navaneeth Krishnan, George Poonthottam (Sr.), Reeha Khader K.
Table of Contents
2. Parties disputed res judicata applicability, necessity of municipal approval, impact on nearby schools, and procedural defects at admission stage. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 )
3. Single Judge disposed writ petition without counter affidavits, ignoring pending related petition and procedure under Rule 12, warranting reconsideration. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 )
4. Writ petition disposed at admission without hearing respondents and without considering pending related matter warrants setting aside and remand. (Para 14 , 16 )
5. Appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside; writ petition restored; parties may implead; status quo on admissions maintained. (Para 17 )
6. Can a writ petition be disposed of at admission stage without giving respondents opportunity to file counter affidavits?
No, the court held that disposing at admission without counter affidavits and without considering pending related petition was improper, warranting reconsideration. (Para 14 )
7. Is the principle of constructive res judicata applicable to a subsequent writ petition seeking different reliefs on same subject matter?
The court found arguable points regarding contradictions and constructive res judicata but did not decide, leaving it for consideration on merits. (Para 14 )
8. What is the procedure under Rule 12 of Chapter VI of Kerala Education Rules for introducing co-education?
Rule 12 requires permission from the Director of Education, considering factors like availability of nearby schools; the court noted these aspects for reconsideration. (Para 15 , 16 )
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.09.2026, THE COURT ON 08.10.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Muralee Krishna S., J.
The appellants, who are third parties to W.P.(C)No.15783 of2026, filed this writ appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, seeking leave of this Court to challenge the judgment dated 28.04.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.
2. This writ appeal was moved during the summer vacation and, by the order dated 12.05.2026, the Division Bench held the sitting during the summer vacation in which one among us [Muralee Krishna S., J.] granted an interim order in favour of the appellants, making it clear that any decision taken pursuance of the said judgment shall be subject to the final decision in the leave petition. By the order dated 21.05.2026 in I.A.No.1 of 2026, we allowed the said interlocutory application, granting leave to the appellants; however, without prejudice to the right of the 1st respondent-writ petitioner to raise the question of maintainability of the writ appeal at the appropriate stage. By the order dated 29.06.2026 in I.A.No.4 of 2026, additional respondents 9 to 16, who are the teachers of SMV Higher Secondary School, Poonjar, a School managed by the 2nd appellant, are impleaded in the appeal subject to the very same condition stipulated in the order dated 21.05.2026 in I.A.No.1 of 2026.
3. W.P.(C)No.15783 of 2026 is one filed by the 1st respondent-writ petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs;
“i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 7th Respondent, Secretary of Erattupetta Municipality to issue approval letter forthwith on Exhibit P4 application, to the petitioner school to complete the formalities and for onward transmission to the respondents 1 and 2 for granting approval to introduce the co-education scheme in the petitioner school.
ii. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 to grant permission to start the co-education scheme in the petitioner school without insisting for the receipt of approval letter from the 6th respondent Municipality, so as to enable the petitioner to start the co-education during the academic year 2026-2027 itself.
iii. To call for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P3 circular and quash the same, to the extent it insists for approval of the Municipality for applying the co-education scheme, after declaring that such a procedure is not the one contemplated in the relevant Statute or Rules.
iv. To declare that the Model Code of Conduct is not a bar for consideration of the Petitioners application by the 6th or 7th or 1st and 2nd respondents in granting approval to start co-education.”
4. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the 1st respondent-writ petitioner School (The ‘School’ for short) is a well- established Educational Institution in the aided Sector, functioning in Erattupetta, Kottayam District. The School is represented by its Manager. The School is a girls-only school. The Managing Trustee of the School decided to introduce co-education in the School, for which an appropriate resolution is passed by the Managing Trustees, approved by the General Body and the PTA, as evident from Ext.P1 proceedings passed in the General Body by the members of the Trust dated 17.02.2026, and Ext.P2 proceedings passed in the PTA Executive Committee dated 17.02.2026. The Government of Kerala issued Ext.P3 Circular dated 21.06.2022, dealing with the procedure for applying for mixed/Co-education scheme in the Schools, which stipulates a requirement of permission from the concerned local body before applying to the General Education Department. Such a procedure is neither contemplated in the Kerala Education Rules, 1959 (‘KER’ for short) nor prescribed in the Kerala Municipality Act or Rules. However, the 1st respondent-w
