Kerala High Court
WP(C)/37761/2009 of GAURI NANDANA Vs DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS on 30 December 2009
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DECEMBER 2009 / 9TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37761 of 2009(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- GAURI NANDANA (MINOR ,AGED 12 YEARS) 6TH STANDARD STUDENT, MOUNT CARMEL GIRLS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DECEMBER 2009 / 9TH POUSHA 1931
WP(C).No. 37761 of 2009(M)
--------------------------
PETITIONER:
---------------
GAURI NANDANA (MINOR ,AGED 12 YEARS)
6TH STANDARD STUDENT, MOUNT CARMEL GIRLS HIGHER
SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY HER
FATHER, V.M.PRADEEP, AGED 37 YEARS,
S/O.V.C.MADHAVAN, VELLARAYIL HOUSE,
SOUTH PAMBADY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
SRI.SAIJO HASSAN
SRI.A.S.SABU
RESPONDENTS:
---------------
1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
TRIVANDRUM.
2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.
3. THE CONVENER
SUB DISTRICT YOUTH FESTIVAL
KOTTAYAM EAST PRINCIPAL M.T.HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, KOTTAYAM.
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,
KOTTAYAM.
5. THE GENERAL CONVENER
REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM 2009-2010
KOTTAYAM PRINCIPAL, ST.THOMAS HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, PALA.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
-----------------------------
W.P.(C) No.37761 of 2009-M
------------------------------
Dated this the 30[th] day of December, 2009.
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.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner participated in the sub district level competitions formono act in the School Kalotsavam for this year. Dissatisfied with theresults of the competition, the petitioner filed an appeal which wasrejected by Ext.P5. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P5 seeking thefollowing reliefs:
“i)issue a writ of mandamus or any otherappropriate writ, direction or order, directing therespondents to allow the petitioner to participate in theitem Mono act in the Kottayam Revenue District SchoolKalotsavam 2009-2010.
ii)and to issue such other reliefs as thisHonourable Court may deem fit and proper in thecircumstances of this case.”
2. From Ext.P5 it is clear that the only complaint of the petitioner is that the stage in which the petitioner was required toperform was below par. I am not satisfied that this is a ground forinterference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in so far thathandicap was applicable equally to all the participants including the firstprize winner. That being so, I do not find any merit in the writ petition.Accordingly the same is dismissed.
ab
S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE