Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Aleesha.V.Kamal vs State Of Kerala on 11 January, 2017

Author: Shaji P. Chaly

Bench: Shaji P.Chaly

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                        PRESENT:

                    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

              THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2017/29TH POUSHA, 1938

                               WP(C).No. 1599 of 2017 (Y)

                                  ---------------------------


PETITIONER(S):
-------------

                 ALEESHA.V.KAMAL, AGE 14 YEARS,
                 STD IX, PROVIDENCE GIRLS HSS,
                 KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER KAMALASANAN,
                 AGED 51 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, RESIDING AT VENGACKAL HOUSE,
                 THANNERPANTHAL, CALICUT, 673010




                 BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANJAY
                         SMT.A.PARVATHI MENON
                         SRI. RAJESH.P.K

RESPONDENT(S):
--------------

          1.     STATE OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
                 REPRESENTED BY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
                 TRIVANDRUM-695001

          2.     PROGRAMME CONVENOR, KOZHIKODE REVENUE DISTRICT
                 KALOLSAVAM-678001

          3.     DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
                 KOZHIKODE DISTRICT- 678001

          4.     APPEAL COMMITTEE,
                 KOZHIKODE REVENUE DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM-678001

          5.     DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE-678001

          6.     PROGRAMME CONVENOR, KERALA STATE KALOLSAVAM,
                 KANNUR-670001


                  BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.S.KANNAN

                 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
                 19-01-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
                 FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 1599 of 2017 (Y)

                               APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT.P1:      TRUE COPIES OF CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER AND THE TEAM
             MEMBERS

EXT.P2:      TRUE COPIES OF CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER AND THE TEAM
             MEMBERS

EXT.P3:      TRUE COPIES OF CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER AND THE TEAM
             MEMBERS

EXT.P4:      TRUE COPIES OF CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER AND THE TEAM
             MEMBERS

EXT.P5:      TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OF MEENAKSHI

EXT.P6:      TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OF MALAVILA.P IN GROUP
             DANCE

EXT.P7:      TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OF POOJA R IN KUCHUPUDI

EXT.P8:      TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C-2/17500/2016/IV (81) DATED 11.1.2017


RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:         NIL




                                           //TRUE COPY//




                                           P.A. TO JUDGE

dlk



                         SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
                      ----------------------------
                     W.P.(C) No. 1599 of 2017
             ----------------------------------------
            Dated this the 19th day of January, 2017

                             JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the team leader which participated in the Kozhikode Revenue District Kalolsavam. However, Petitioner and her team could secure only third place with "A" Grade and with no 'grade', Since the petitioner, who have come up for District Level Competition based on an order passed by the appellate committee in the Sub District Level Kololsavam. Being aggrieved petitioner preferred appeal before the appeal committee constituted for the purpose under the manual of guidelines. However, the same is dismissed as per Ext.P8. It is thus challenging Ext.P8 and seeking other related reliefs, this writ petition is filed

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader and perused the documents on record and pleadings put forth.

3. The copy of the appeal memorandum is not produced along with the writ petition. But, from Ext.P8 the grievance voiced by the petitioner is reflected to the effect that there was W.P.(C) No. 1599 of 2017 2 some technical problem and hence failed to perform well. To the said grievance voiced, the appellate committee has stated that it has examined the appeal petition in detail with reference to records produced and connected files available. Therefore, it is also stated that, reasons put forth by the petitioner is not genuine and hence deserves no merit.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended in the writ petition that, even though a complaint was made to the stage manager with respect to the delay that had occurred, and the physical consequences suffered by the participants after the competition like fatigue and migraine the same was not reported by the stage manager. Therefore, learned counsel made a fervent plea to permit the petitioner and her team to participate in the State School Kalolsavam.

5. When the matter came up for admission, learned Government Pleader was directed to take instructions in the matter. Learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that, the appellate committee consisting of nine members including the technical members have considered the case projected by the petitioner in its entirety, the video was seen, W.P.(C) No. 1599 of 2017 3 all the documents were verified and found that the complaint put forth by the petition is not genuine.

5. Taking note of the respective submission and on evaluation of the reasons assigned in Ext.P8 I am satisfied that in the nature of grievance voiced by the petitioner, the appellate authority has assigned sufficient reason eliminating any possibility of arbitrariness or illegality disabling this Court to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Petitioner could not be conferred with any grade since they participated in the District School Kalolsavam on the basis of the order of the appellate committee allowing them to participate in the District School Kalolsavam and as per the manual of guidelines and unless and until they secure more marks than the first rank holder, no grade will be granted.

Writ petition fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE dlk/19/1/