The Kerala High Court has set aside a single bench order that directed a municipality to grant approval for introducing co-education in a girls-only aided school, and has remanded the matter for fresh hearing on merits. The Division Bench of Justice Anil K. Narendran and Justice Muralee Krishna S. held that the single judge disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage without giving an opportunity to affected parties to file counter affidavits, and without considering a pending related writ petition on the same subject matter.

The case originated from an application by Muslim Girls' Higher Secondary School, Erattupetta, a girls-only school in the aided sector, to introduce co-education. The school's managing trustee passed a resolution in February 2026, approved by the general body and the Parent-Teacher Association. The school then applied to the Erattupetta Municipality for approval, as required by a state government circular dated June 21, 2022 (Ext.P3), which mandates a no-objection certificate from the local body before applying to the General Education Department for conversion to a mixed school.

Court Faults Single Judge for Disposing at Admission Stage

The school had earlier filed W.P.(C) No. 10617 of 2026, which was disposed of on March 19, 2026, with a direction to the Municipality Secretary to consider the application within three weeks. When no decision was forthcoming, the school filed a fresh writ petition during the summer vacation, W.P.(C) No. 15783 of 2026, challenging the circular itself and seeking a direction to the Municipality to grant approval.

The single judge, on April 28, 2026, disposed of the writ petition at the admission stage, directing the Municipality Secretary to grant approval within three days, and further stating that if the Secretary failed to do so, the school could proceed with co-education even without the municipality's approval.

The Division Bench found this approach problematic. The Bench noted that the 1st appellant, K.A. Muhammed Ashraf, had already filed W.P.(C) No. 13677 of 2026 challenging the introduction of co-education, which was pending before the same court. The single judge was aware of this pending petition but did not club the two matters or hear the objectors.

"The learned Single Judge ought to have posted the present writ petition also along with the said writ petition, since the subject matter in both the writ petitions is the same," the Division Bench observed.

Additionally, the appellants and the impleaded teachers from nearby schools argued that they were necessary parties and that the single judge's order violated principles of natural justice . The court agreed, stating that the impugned judgment was "liable to be set aside for reconsideration on merits " because the matter was decided without giving the respondents an opportunity to file counter affidavits .

Requirement of Local Body Approval Not Statutory, Says Division Bench

A significant part of the judgment deals with the legal status of the government circular requiring local body approval. The single judge had questioned the necessity of such approval, but the Division Bench went further.

"In fact, the approval of the Municipality is not a statutory requirement as per the KER or Kerala Municipality Act and Rules . So insistence on such an approval is not a mandatory requirement. The only provision to introduce co-education is provided under Rule 12 of Chapter VI of the KER, which confers power exclusively with the Director of Education. So, Ext.P3 circular has no statutory force," the Division Bench noted.

Rule 12 of Chapter VI of the Kerala Education Rules, 1959, deals with admission of boys into girls' schools. It provides that secondary schools recognized as girls' schools shall restrict admission to girls only, but the Director may grant general permission for admitting boys below the age of twelve to classes up to standard VII, provided there are no boys' schools in the locality. The rule also empowers the Director to exempt particular institutions or withdraw exemptions.

The Division Bench emphasized that these aspects must be considered by the Director of General Education while issuing permission for beginning co-education. The single judge's order had bypassed this statutory scheme by directing the municipality to grant approval and allowing the school to proceed without it.

Status Quo Maintained for Admitted Students

The Division Bench was informed that after the single judge's order, the Municipality Secretary issued a no-objection certificate on May 2, 2026, and the Director of General Education issued an order on May 14, 2026, sanctioning co-education. Consequently, 28 boy students were admitted from standard V to standard X and are currently studying in the school.

To safeguard the interests of these students, who were admitted without knowledge of the ongoing dispute, the court ordered that " status quo as of now has to be continued in the 1st respondent-writ petitioner School till a decision has been taken in the writ petition on merits ."

The Division Bench clarified that it was not expressing any view on the legal and factual contentions raised by the parties. The writ petition is restored to the file of the single judge, who will consider it afresh on merits. The appellants and the impleaded additional respondents are at liberty to file applications for impleadment within two weeks from the receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

The court did not rule on the issue of constructive res judicata raised by the appellants, who argued that the second writ petition was barred because the first writ petition had already sought and obtained a direction for consideration of the application. The Division Bench left all such contentions open for the single judge to decide.

The appeal thus succeeds in setting aside the single judge's order, but the practical impact is tempered by the status quo direction, which allows the admitted boy students to continue their studies until the single judge takes a final decision on the school's application for co-education.