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 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Athulya A.V. (Minor) vs The Organising Committee on 21 January, 2014

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

                 TUESDAY,THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2014/1ST MAGHA, 1935

                                    WP(C).No. 1771 of 2014 (V)
                                       ---------------------------

PETITIONER :
---------------------

            ATHULYA A.V. (MINOR),
            STD.IX, BBGHS, NANGIYARKULANGARA
            ALAPPUZHA
            REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER SRI.SURESH BABU, AGED 47
            S/O.KARUNAKARAN NAIR, VANDANAM, CHERTHALA P.O.,
            HARIPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

            BY ADVS.SRI.ARAVINDA KUMAR BABU T.K.
                          SRI.C.P.PRADEEP

RESPONDENTS :
--------------------------

        1. THE ORGANISING COMMITTEE
            FOR THE 26TH ALAPPUZHA REVENUE DISTRICT KALOTSAVAM
            REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL CONVENOR-688001.

        2. THE APPELLATE COMMITTEE,
            26TH ALAPPUZHA REVENUE DISTRICT KALOTSAVAM
            REPRESENTED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION
            ALAPPUZHA-688001.

        3. THE ORGANISING COMMITTEE
            FOR THE 54TH KERALA SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM 2013-2014,
            REPRESENTED BY THE CONVENOR
            PROGRAMME COMMITTEE, PALAKKAD-678001.

        4. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

            BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE


            THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
            ON 21-01-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
            FOLLOWING:


Mn

                                                                        ...2/-

WP(C).No. 1771 of 2014 (V)
--------------------------------------

                                                      APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
-------------------------------------

EXT.P1               TRUE COPY OF THE INCIDENT WAS PROMINENTLY REPORTED
                     MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY ON 06.01.2014.

EXT.P1(a)            TRUE COPY OF THE INCIDENT WAS PROMINENTLY REPORTED
                     DESHABHIMANI DAILY ON 06.01.2014.

EXT.P2               TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MERITS AWARDED TO THE
                     PETITIONER AND TO HER TEAM MEMBERS.

EXT.P3               TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION ORDER FROM THE 2ND
                     RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :                            NIL
----------------------------------------------------------

                                                                  //TRUE COPY//




                                                                  P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn



                   P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
             ..............................................................................
                        W.P.(C)No.1771 OF 2014
              .........................................................................
                    Dated this the 21st January, 2014

                                    J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was a member of the team for the event

-Group Dance in the Alappuzha Revenue District School Kalolsavam. Since the first prize was denied to the petitioner, an appeal was preferred, which did not turn to be fruitful, as borne by Ext.P3, thus driving the petitioner to approach this Court.

2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that two different events were performed simultaneously in which students had to participate, as a result of which there was some confusion.

3. The learned Government Pleader, on the basis of the instruction, submits that since Bharatanatyam and Kuchippudy events were finalised almost simultaneously at 4..57 p.m, the organizers, taking note of the facts and circumstances, waited for the petitioner's team to come to the stage and it was accordingly, that the petitioner's team was permitted to participate in the event at 5.30 p.m. The learned Government Pleader also points out that the hue and cry raised by some others was only because of the delay caused in performance of the event, which W.P.(C)No.1771 OF 2014 2 in fact was for the benefit of the petitioner, as the organizers waited for the petitioner's team.

4. Despite the opportunity given, as above, the petitioner's team could secure only a total of 246.5 with 'A' Grade, whereas the first prize winner got 255 marks and the petitioner's team stands placed at 4th. The performance of the petitioner's team was evaluated by the Judging Committee as well as the Appeal Committee and specific reasons have been given as mentioned in Ext.P3.

After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that this is not a fit case to invoke the discretionary jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE lk