Kerala High Court
Archana Raj vs State Of Kerala
Author: P.R. Ramachandra Menon
Bench: P.R.Ramachandra Menon
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
MONDAY,THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/22ND POUSHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 818 of 2015 (B)
--------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
ARCHANA RAJ, AGED 15 YEARS, D/O.RAJAN,
PAREKKATTU HOUSE, VADAKUMURY POST,
PERINGOTTUKARA, REPRESENTED BY
NATURAL GUARDIAN FATHER RAJAN, AGED 49,
S/O. KRISHNA PANICKER, PAREKKATTU HOUSE,
VADAKUMURY POST, PERINGOTTUKARA,
THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.SHERRY J. THOMAS
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY,
GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, DPI OFFICE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
CONVENER, KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM,
KOZHIKODE - 673 032.
4. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, DDE OFFICE,
THRISSUR(CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR
REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM) - 680004.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.C.VINCENT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 818 of 2015 (B)
------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE AWARDED TO THE
PETITIONER IN CLAS VII DATED 24-11-11.
EXT.PIA : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE AWARDED TO THE
PETITIONER IN CLASS VII FROM DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
EDUCATION.
EXT. P1B : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 4-1-13 AWARDED TO
THE PETITIONER IN CLASS VIII FROM DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
EDUCATION.
EXT. P1C: THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE AWARDED TO THE
PETITIONER IN CLAS IX IN THRISSUR REVENUE DISTRICT
KALOLSAVAM 2013-2014.
EXT. P1D : THE TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE AWARDED TO THE
PETITIONER IN CLASS X IN CHERPU SUB DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM.
EXHIBIT P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE PARTICIPANTS' CARD ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESULT SHEET OF NADODI NRUTHAM
(GIRLS).
EXHIBIT P4 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN APPEAL DATED 8-12-2014.
EXHIBIT P5: THE TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF MANUAL (PREVIOUS
YEAR) AVAILABLE ON THE WEB SITE OF THE RESPONDENTS
DEPARTMENT.
EXHIBIT P6: THE TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH REPORT IN MALAYALA MANORAMA
NEWS PAPER.
EXHIBIT P7 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE OF RTI DATED 6-1-2015.
EXT. P7A : THE TRUE COPY OF THE REP;LY DATED 8-12-14 GIVEN TO RTI.
EXT. P7B : THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: - NIL
---------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
mbr/
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.818 of 2015
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of January, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner was a participant in 'Nadodi Nrutham (Girls) in the Revenue District level competition. She got only the 5th place with A Grade. Aggrieved of the same, the petitioner moved appellate committee. But the appeal came to be turned down and hence the writ petition.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was forced to wait in costumes for about 6 hours. It is also submitted that, broken pieces of bangles and other metal ornaments lying on the stage affected performance of the petitioner.
3. The learned Government Pleader submits on instructions that the allegation is wrong. The judging panel, who evaluated the event consisted of renowned persons in the field. First judge, Smt. Jayasree Kalakshethra is a diploma holder in 'folk dance' with six years' experience. The second judge, Smt.RLV Jayasree is a diploma holder in 'classical dance' and is having 20 years' W.P.(C) No.818 of 2015 2 experience. The third judge. Mrs.Kalamandalam Preetha Ravi is also having diploma in 'classical dance' with 20 years' experience. With regard to the score sheet, they were giving separate marks for different categories.
After going through the pleadings and proceedings and the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds that the petitioner has not established any tenable ground to call for interference. Accordingly, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp