Kerala Education Act | Appointment Of Manager Void If Property Of Aided School Is Alienated Without Govt Approval: High Court K. Salma Jennath 17 May 2025 7:30 PM

S.6 S.6 Kerala Education Act | Appointment Of Manager Void If Property Of Aided School Is Alienated Without Govt Approval: High Court Listen to this Article The Kerala High Court recently found that the appointment of a manager by the owner after receiving title of property of an aided school was void under S. 6 of the Kerala Education Act since no previous permission was obtained from the government before obtaining the title. In a Writ Appeal preferred by the teachers of the said aided school, the Division Bench comprising of Justice A. Muhamed Mustaque and Justice P. Krishna Kumar considered the challenge to the appointment of the manager of the school by the current owner in the light of S. 6 of the KEA. Also Read - Can't Tolerate Experimentation In Litigation: Kerala High Court Raps Party For Filing Case Without Disclosing Earlier Matter Seeking Same Relief Finding the entire transaction, including the appointment of manager and alienation of property, to be void, the Bench held that permission cannot be obtained merely by invoking Rule 5A of Chapter III of the KER when S.6 is a prerequisite. It observed thus: “…We make it clear that in all other matters, before the aided school property is being alienated, it is the mandate of the law that permission shall be obtained from the Government or any officer authorised by the Government in this regard, and such permission cannot be obtained merely by invoking Rule 5A of Chapter III of the KER, which is only a procedural rule enabling the recording of a change in ownership consequent upon an approved transfer or by operation of the law…” Also Read - Strict Distinction Between Residential And Non-Residential Areas Is Challenging In Era Of Rapid Urbanisation: Kerala High Court The Court also made a detailed comparison between Section 6 of the Act and Rule 5A of KER, and highlighted the purposes of both the provisions in a tabular form. According to the Court, the objective of S.6 is to ensure that the transfer of property of aided schools is not done indiscriminately, adversely affect the working of the school and jeopardising the future of the students. When no officer is appointed for consideration as per the law, it is upon the transferor or transferee to move the Government for obtaining the previous permission. Also Read - Kerala High Court Weekly Round-Up: May 12 – 18, 2025 Noting that there is a lack of clarity in the law regarding such transactions, the Division Bench clarified that it is upon the Government to decide whether permission can be given or not and directed the Government to consider the matter afresh under S.6 KEA along with R.5A KER. Observing that there is nothing to prevent the Government from reconsidering the approval even though transfer was already effected without prior permission, the Court allowed the Writ Appeal and set aside the judgment of the Single Bench. The Court left it to the Government to decide whether post facto approval can be granted or not in this case. Also Read - Order 11 Rule 1 CPC | Plea For Interrogatories Can't Be Used To Make Roving Inquiry, 'Test Of Prejudice' Will Decide Its Merit: Kerala High Court However, the Court also stated that though such a transfer of property would be null and void for the purposes of the KEA and the Rules thereunder, it will not become void as regards the transactions under the Transfer of Property Act, 1802. Case No: WA No. 4 of 2025 Case Title: Rashida K. and others v. N. Sidrathul Munthaha and others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 277 Counsel for Petitioners: V. Varghese Counsel for Respondents: S.M. Prem, H. Narayanan, P.M. Pareeth, Aiswarya Venugopal, Najeeb P.S.