*1 et al v. CRAWFORD al. 18382. IRWIN et Argued October 1953 Decided November *2 Mann, W. plaintiffs in error.
Nelson & Nelson, Carl K. Nelson, contra. Wyatt, Presiding Justice. Each county in this State is made of the district, management and control and the law school county board of education. county is in the vested
schools of all provided by law that It is further 32-404, 32-901. Code §§ controversy in reference to construction matters local law shall be submitted the school administration of with for decision board of education peti- Code 32-910. Education. State by appearing- adequate case an tioners this controversy here county board of education before the be taken proposed to provided the action involved, jurisdic- which the board has is a matter over board of education law. tion and is not It is here contended that without the of this is a matter
board of education taken, decided, however would and that the action has to law. This court said jurisdiction of these' county boards education have *3 not and that courts will interfere local controversies the contrary illegal or to law. See Colston proposed action is not the v. Ga. S. 2d and cases there Hutchinson, 763), 208 559 E. that, county the language the of cited. This means actions law, will illegal are or to the intervene boards courts doing prevent something illegal from or the board in order to equity that exer- “There doubt but will to law. is no public restrain acts threatened jurisdiction or acts of cor- cise to public officers, or which are porations boards, or commissions of authority, scope the of their outside their ultra vires jurisdiction, authority.” 356, unlawful or without 28 Am. Jur. enjoined 166. “School boards or school officers be from § scope powers acting beyond or in violation of the law of inadequate.” at 43 C. where the law is J. § recognized many right the of a taxpayer times This court has equity prevent public of to apply to to a court officers from performing they or acts which have no 74 McMichael, 431), to do. Smith v. 203 Ga. there cited. It is therefore clear if the action here cases enjoined county be over the sought to which school board they a matter about which had a jurisdiction, had was dis- have interfered cretion, should not but should left the court
225 county by hearing the proceed before parties to the clear that right the State board. It is likewise of to the county dealing board is with a the if the jurisdiction board had be which the no and would matter over law, properly contrary to the trial court interfered or by injunction. be now look whether or not the action
We to see matter by the board education was a which taken over only law they had authorized law. The was power to of education the consolidate giving the in Code which reads as schools is contained any county the “The board of education of shall have follows: if, welfare the schools of opinion, in their pupils require, consolidate two best interests of school, more into one be located said board or attending same, place the school- convenient district to be located near the center of the or districts house as possible.” So that a of schools order to as consolidation more authorized law must the consolidation “two or into one school.” public the common or Our deals with being composed grades, being the first 8 denom- as elementary grammar grades, inated the last high-school grades. the entire However, as fully proposition is dealt with as a This E. recognized Jackson, in Brinson Assembly act Indeed of the General which quoted providing for the consolidation above Code section as along act taken, provides further same schools was county municipality any “The education of follows: board of *4 high or more shall have the to establish one schools high opinion may necessary their and junior as in through funds.” 32-933. possible local taxation Code § grades recognizes high-school part This section a the common and not a within themselves unless school school quoted. provisions of the act last above established under proposed now to be done the case under What is considera- upper high-school Simply grades the four tion? to take operating, combine them of one school now established already another school the same established and operating, containing both schools now the common amount school. Does this to the consolidation of “two or more into one school”? We do not think so. This simply part action would amount of a of one school moving neither the it another. It is consolidation of by law, nor it establishing high a is County the Wheeler of Education was of the board and con- trary and, illegal. therefore, judge to law The trial committed in overruling general no error petition demurrer to the or in granting temporary injunction. a
Judgment concur, except All the Duckworth, Justices affirmed. Jnot participating. C. Candler Hawkins, JJ., concur specially. Justices, concurring specially. While
Candler
Hawkins,
ruling
we concur in
this case
under Code
only
board of education is
authorized to con-
“two
school,”
solidate
or more
one
schools into
not au-
thorized
portion only
that section
to consolidate
of one
another, yet county
school with
education do have
pupils
to transfer
another,
if in
judgment it is
best
interest of the
or the
schools;
and,
in the exercise
education
boards of
of that discretion,
the courts will not interfere
gross
unless there be a
abuse of dis-
cretion. Keener v. Board
Education
County,
Gwinnett
(3
Ga. 299
886);
S. E. 2d
Harrell,
Fordham v.