Kerala High Court
Rooba I.(Minor) vs General Convenor on 28 November, 2016
Author: Shaji P.Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 38052 of 2016 (F)
---------------------------
PETITIONER:
-----------
ROOBA I.(MINOR), AGED 17 YEARS,
D/O. S MUHAMMED IQBAL,
NAZEEN VILLA, T.B JUNCTION,
ATTINGAL P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REP. BY FATHER S MUHAMMED IQBAL.
BY ADVS.SRI.M.ZIYAD
SRI.T.A.PRAKASH
RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. GENERAL CONVENOR,
SCHOOL LEVEL YOUTH FESTIVAL,
GOVT. MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. GENERAL CONVENOR,
ATTINGAL SUB DISTRICT YOUTH FESTIVAL,
GOVT. MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3. CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE,
O/O ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
4. AKHIL KRISHNAN & TEAM,
GOVT. MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ATTINGAL , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RON BASTIAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
mbr/
WP(C).No. 38052 of 2016 (F)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN
APPEAL COMMITTEE BY THE PETITIONER AND ITS
DECISION.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
-----------------------
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No.38052 of 2016
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of November, 2016
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a first year Vocational Higher Secondary School student studying in Government Model Boys' Vocational Higher Secondary School, Attingal. Petitioner and her team participated in the item, "Vanchipattu" in School Youth Festival conducted by the 1st respondent. Petitioner and the team members secured 3rd place. Aggrieved, an appeal was preferred before the Appellate Authority, which was dismissed as per Ext.P1 order. It is thus challenging Ext.P1, this writ petition is filed.
2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned Government Pleader and perused the documents on record and the pleadings put forth by the petitioner.
3. The appeal memorandum is not produced along with this writ petition. However, from Ext.P1 appellate order, it is clear that, the grounds raised was discrepancy in the judgment. The said issue was considered by the Appellate W.P.(C). No.38052 of 2016 2 Authority in accordance with the grievance put forth by the petitioner and has arrived at a definite finding that, there was no technical perfection and synchronization on the part of the petitioner while the event was performed. It was thereupon the appeal was dismissed.
4. Taking note of the respective submissions and perusing Ext.P1 order, I am satisfied that, all procedures complied by the Appellate Authority are in accordance with law and in accordance with the grievance put forth by the petitioner. I do not think, petitioner has made out any case of illegality or arbitrariness warranting interference of this court, exercising the power of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Writ petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE smv 29.11.2016