Kerala High Court
Shifas Ashraf (Minor) vs General Convenor on 21 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
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 38275 of 2016 (H)
-------------------------------------------
PETITIONER(S) :
-------------------------
SHIFAS ASHRAF (MINOR),
AGED 17 YEARS, S/O.A.ASHRAF,
+2 STUDENT, GOVT.MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REP. BY FATHER A.ASHRAF, S/O.ABDUL SHUKOORTH,
MANNATH MANZIL, PULIMOODU, CHIRAYINKEEZHU,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
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. PRANAV J.,
GOVT.MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, ATTINGAL,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
5. MUHSIN,
GOVT.MODEL BOYS HIGHER SECONDARY &
VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S.KANNAN
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Msd.
WP(C).No. 38275 of 2016 (H)
------------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT-P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF APPEAL COMMITTEE
DATED 21.11.2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A.TO JUDGE.
Msd.
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). No.38275 of 2016
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2016
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a second year Higher Secondary School student, who is studying in Government Model Boys Higher Secondary & Vocational Higher Secondary School, Attingal, Thiruvananthapuram. Petitioner and his eight member team participated in Cluster, which includes Parichamuttu, Dafmuttu, Aravanamuttu, Kolkali and Poorakali in School Kalotsavam conducted by the 1st respondent. The selection committee has selected only Dafmuttu and Aravanamuttu as 1st and 2nd in the Cluster respectively for participating in Sub District level. According to the petitioner, petitioner and his team performed well in the competition, however, they were dropped to the 3rd place due to favouritism and biased judgment. The selection committee has appreciated the performance of the petitioner and his team. Being aggrieved by the action of the selection committee, petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Appeal Committee constituted W.P.(C). No.38275 of 2016 2 under the manual issued by the Director of Public Instructions, State of Kerala. The appeal was rejected as per Ext.P1. It is thus challenging Ext.P1 and seeking other reliefs, 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.
3. Copy of the appeal memorandum preferred before the Appellate Committee is not produced before this court. However, what is discernible from Ext.P1 appellate order is that, the grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the stage was small and there was electricity failure, the Appellate Committee after appreciating the grievance put forth by the petitioner has found that, the complaint raised by the petitioner has no basis. There was only one team in the competition. It is also stated that, petitioner and the team secured A grade, however, as per the provisions of the manual, only two teams can be sent from the school and there is no reason to allow the appeal filed by the petitioner. W.P.(C). No.38275 of 2016 3
4. Taking note of the respective submissions made across the Bar and on a perusal of Ext.P1, I find, Appellate Committee has taken the decision traversing through the grievance voiced by the petitioner and after making due enquiries with respect to the grievances put forth by the petitioner. I do not find any illegality or arbitrariness on the part of the Appellate Committee in passing Ext.P1 order, since the same was passed after hearing the petitioner also.
Therefore, writ petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE smv 30.11.2016