Judgment :- Heard counsel for petitioner and the Government Pleader. 2. In this Original Petition, petitioner prays for issue of a writ of certiorari, quashing Exts.P2 and P4 orders and for the issue of a writ of mandamus, commanding respondents to approve the appointment of Mr. R.B. Prasheed as Manager of Kavumattom Upper Primary School, Nateri. 3. It is petitioner's case that the father of petitioner, Mr. Mavilakandy Appu Nair, who was the educational agency and Manager of Kavumatlom Upper Primary School expired on 28-10-1989, that under a registered will, the school and the properties where the school is situated were bequeathed to her and that she is the educational agency. She further averred that she being a Government employee, cannot function as the Manager of the school, in view of the provisions contained in the Kerala Educational Rules, that in the circumstances, she appointed her son Mr. R.B. Prasheed as Manager of the school with effect from 29-10-1989, that the appointment order along with necessary enclosures such as the will, death certificate of Mr. Mavilakandy Appu Nair, solvency certificate in respect of Mr. R.B. Prasheed, his statement expressing willingness and objection statements by the staff of the School, etc., were submitted to the 3rd respondent for approval and that Ext.P1 is the petition submitted by the petitioner. 4. Changing of personnel of the Manager of Aided Schools have to be reported to the Educational Officer and approval obtained. Ext.P1 petition submitted by the petitioner was dismissed with the following observations: "As per Rule 5 of Chapter III, K.E.R. all the changes in the personnel of the manager of aided schools have to be reported to the Educational Officer and approval obtained. But Smt. Rugmini Amma has not obtained approval from the Educational Officer to act as educational agency as per the rules." 5. Petitioner sent an appeal to Director of Public Instructions. But as per Ext.P4 order, the Director of Public Instructions rejected the appeal, saying that permission of the Department is necessary not only to establishing, but also for maintaining school and when an Educational Agency transfers the school to another or when a person becomes possessed of school by inheritance, he has to get permission to maintain the school in his name. In this Original petition, petitioner challenges Exts. P2 and P4. 6. In this Original petition, petitioner challenges Exts. P2 and P4. 6. This court in Kesava Kurup v. State of Kerala (1987 (2) KLT 801) has pointed out that S.6 of Kerala Education Act contemplates only restriction on alienation of aided school property and in a case where the ownership of the property along with the management is transferred, S.6 is not attracted and therefore no previous permission is required. However, learned Government pleader relied on Rule 5 and 5A of Chapter III, which reads as follows: "5. Change of Management-(1) All changes in the personnel of the Managers of aided institutions shall be immediately reported to the Educational Officer and approval obtained. (2) Appointments and changes approved by the Educational Officer shall be reported to the Director. Note: The Rules 4 and 5 do not apply to change of management involving change of ownership. 5A. Change of management involving change of ownership:-- (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in these rules, no change of Management of any aided school involving change of ownership shall be effected except with the previous permission of the Director. The Director may grant such permission unless the grant of such permission will in his opinion, adversely affect the working of the institution and the interests of the staff and the person to whom the Management is transferred." In view of Rule 5 of Chapter III, all changes in the personnel of the Managers should be immediately reported to the Educational Officer. The Manager, Appu Nair, died and petitioner's son Prasheed was appointed as Manager by the petitioner. Petitioner reported the change of personnel of Manager to the Educational Officer. Thus, there is compliance with Rule 5. 7. The objection raised by the Department is that there is no compliance with Rule SA. In the instant case, there is no transfer of any management. Of course, the property of the school and the management of the school have vested in the petitioner by virtue of a will executed by her father, who was the previous Educational Agency. The question to be considered is whether Rule 5A is attracted in the case of a will created by Educational Agency bequeathing the right of management of the school and the property of the school to another person. In my view, it would be difficult to bring such cases within the ambit of Rule 5A of Chapter III. The question to be considered is whether Rule 5A is attracted in the case of a will created by Educational Agency bequeathing the right of management of the school and the property of the school to another person. In my view, it would be difficult to bring such cases within the ambit of Rule 5A of Chapter III. Petitioner has intimated the authorities of the will executed in her favour. She also forwarded the will, death certificate of her father and other documents required for approval of appointment of her son Mr.R.B.Prasheed as Manager, If it is interpreted that even in the case of a will bequeathing the management and ownership of the property that a previous approval of the Department is required, it would mean that the testator should get previous approval before the will is executed. In my view, such an interpretation would be quite unreasonable. The wording of Rule 5 also does not warrant such an interpretation. Petitioner has already intimated the Department about the vesting of the management and the property of school and the nomination of her son as the Manager by her in the circumstances mentioned in her communication. I therefore quash Exts.P2 and P4 and direct the Assistant Educational Officer, the 3rd respondent herein, to consider the applications filed by petitioner for appointment of her son as the Manager of the school afresh. Original Petition is disposed of as above. Issue photocopy on usual terms.