Kerala High Court
WP(C)/40761/2022 of VISHNU PRIYA S. (MINOR) Vs THE CHAIRMAN on 30 December 2022
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 9TH POUSHA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 40761 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S: VISHNU PRIYA S. (MINOR), AGED 16 YEARS REPRESENTED BY HER GUARDIAN, SUBHA K, W/O. VASUDEVAN K, AGED 47 YEARS, PUTHENPURAYIL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 30[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 9TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 40761 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:
VISHNU PRIYA S. (MINOR), AGED 16 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER GUARDIAN, SUBHA K, W/O. VASUDEVAN K,AGED 47 YEARS, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PUTHIYAVILA P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690531.
BY ADVS.K.M.JAMALUDHEENLATHA PRABHAKARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1THE CHAIRMAN, ORGANIZING COMMITTEE, STATE SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM, KOZHIKODE-673001.KALOLSAVAM, KOZHIKODE-673001.
2THE CHAIRMAN,
APPEAL COMMITTEE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT SCHOOL YOUTH
FESTIVAL/ DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, ALAPPUZHA, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, COLLECTORATE JUNCTION, COLLECTORATE P.O, ALAPPUZHA-688001.COLLECTORATE JUNCTION, COLLECTORATE P.O, ALAPPUZHA-688001.
BY SMT.ANIMA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON30.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 30th day of December 2022
The petitioner was a participant in ‘Kuchuppudi’ Dancecompetition in the District School Kalolsavam of AlappuzhaDistrict. The petitioner lost first prize by four marks.
2. The petitioner contends that the carpet on the stage was not properly laid which has adversely affected the performance ofthe petitioner. Though the petitioner has raised the saidallegation, the Appeal Committee did not properly appreciate thearguments of the petitioner.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner andthe learned Government Pleader.
4. This Court in judgment in W.P.(C)No.40794 of 2022 andconnected cases has held that while assessing the performancein School Kalolsavam, this Court cannot go into the issue ofaward of marks and infrastructural facilities. This is a matter of fact adjudication, which this Court is not competent to exercise its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
5. I have gone through Ext.P5 appellate order of the Appeal Committee. The Appeal Committee has adverted to all thearguments raised by the petitioner in the appeal and has passedExt.P5 order. The petitioner’s case is that Ext.P5 is not aspeaking order. Taking into consideration the time line withinwhich the Appellate Committee has to pass orders on appeals, Ido not find that Ext.P5 is illegal in any manner.
The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESHJUDGE
uu30.12.2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 40761/2022