45 S.E.2d 442 | Ga. | 1947
1. The County Board of Education of Telfair County is empowered by law to fix the area to be served by each public school and to locate the site of the schoolhouse therein as near the center of the area served as practicable, and such action by the county board is final unless objections are filed, in which event a hearing by the board must be held and a decision rendered on the objections made. Only such latter decision by the county board is reviewable on appeal to the State board.
(a) The State Board of Education being a tribunal with limited jurisdiction for hearing appeals, matters essential to its jurisdiction must appear *153 on the face of its decision, and where as here the decision of the State board affirmatively shows that there was before it on appeal no decision of the county board rendered after hearing objections or complaints, the State board was without jurisdiction and its decision is a nullity.
(b) The action of the county board in fixing the location for the schoolhouse, not having been objected to, is final, and the court did not err in its judgment refusing to enjoin the county board from building the schoolhouse at the site thus chosen.
These facts appearing from the pleadings and the evidence before the judge at the interlocutory hearing, judgment was rendered denying an interlocutory injunction, and the petitioner excepted.
This court in Keever v. Board of Education of GwinnettCounty,
The Code, § 32-910, constitutes the county board of education a tribunal for hearing and determining local controversies in reference to the construction or administration of the school laws. It makes their decisions final unless an appeal to the State board is taken. It requires that such appeal be in writing, that it set forth the question in dispute, the decision of the county board, and the "testimony as agreed upon by the parties to the controversy, or if they fail to agree, upon the testimony as reported by the county superintendent of schools." In thus requiring that the appeal contain the testimony heard by the county board, the law shows an intent that the State board be restricted at the hearing on appeal to the testimony previously considered by the county board. This would prohibit a de novo trial by the State board. This is further supported by the fact that the law has given the county board wide discretionary powers, and whether or not it has abused its discretion can be ascertained only by a consideration of the testimony which it heard and upon which its decision is based. The conclusion is in harmony with the further policy of the law to give to the local authorities as much power and responsibility as possible for the conduct of the public schools. It accords with the undeniable fact that the members of the county board, being familiar with the local conditions and circumstances, are in a better position to adjust local matters to existing conditions than the State board, which is far removed.
The provisions of the law which specify the essentials of an appeal show that only the decisions of the county board made on disputed issues are appealable. If there has been no issue *156
heard and decided by the county board, there can be no parties and no testimony which the law authorizing an appeal contemplates. We think that this court in Meadows v. Board ofEducation,
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, J.,who took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.