Kerala High Court
WP(C)/40019/2015 of ANN MARY J.AQUINA (MINOR) Vs STATE OF KERALA on 29 December 2015
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/8TH POUSHA, 1937 WP(C).No. 40019 of 2015 (B) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ ANN MARY J.AQUINA (MINOR), AGED 12 YEARS VIITH STANDARD STUDENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/8TH POUSHA, 1937
WP(C).No. 40019 of 2015 (B)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
------------------
ANN MARY J.AQUINA (MINOR), AGED 12 YEARS
VIITH STANDARD STUDENT FATHIMA GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, FORT KOCHI REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER BEENA JOLLY, D/O.DAVID.P.D PADINHATTUMURI, P.O.KUMBALANGI, KOCHI-7.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR
SMT.K.K.CHANDRALEKHA
RESPONDENTS:
------------------------
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE CHAIRMAN(ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER), SCHOOL LEVEL APPEAL COMMITTEE, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI- 682 002. SCHOOL LEVEL APPEAL COMMITTEE, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI- 682 002. 3. FATHIMA GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, FORT KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS HEADMISTRESS FORT KOCHI-682 001. FORT KOCHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS HEADMISTRESS FORT KOCHI-682 001. 4. GENERAL CONVENER, SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM MAR BASIL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOTHAMANGALAM ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM MAR BASIL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KOTHAMANGALAM ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ERNAKULAM-682 011. OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ERNAKULAM-682 011.
Page 1 of 3
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI T.R.RAJESH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON29-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT AWARED TO THE PETITIONER IN
ERNAKULAM REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2014-2015
P2 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
P3 TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF MERIT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER
P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 21.12.2015
P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KERALA SCHOOLKALOLSAVAM MANUAL.KALOLSAVAM MANUAL.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
TRUE COPY
P.S. TO JUDGE
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J
-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C.)No.40019 Of 2015
-------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 29[th] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2015
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is a 7[th] standard student in Fathima Girls HighSchool, Fort Kochi, Ernakulam has filed this Writ Petition seeking a writ ofcertiorari to quash Ext.P4 order and seeking a writ of mandamuscommanding respondents 2, 4 and 5 to permit her to participate in theitem Bharathanatyam in Ernakulam Revenue District School Kalolsavam.
Page 2 of 3
2. Heard arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner andalso the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
3. The pleadings and materials on record would show that thepetitioner participated in the item 'Bharathanatyam' in Sub-DistrictSchool Kalolsavam. But she could not secure first place. Aggrieved bythe same, the petitioner submitted appeal before the Appeal Committee,which ended in dismissal by Ext.P4 order. A reading of Ext.P4 orderwould show that the main grievance raised by the petitioner in the appealfiled before the Appeal Committee was that the sound system provided inthe stage was not properly functioning. If the aforesaid defect was therein the sound system it would have certainly affected the performance ofother candidates as well. Further, as evident from Ext.P4, there is adifference of 48 marks between the petitioner and the person who W.P.(C).No.40019/15
secured the first position.
W.P.(C).No.40019/15
secured the first position.
4. The petitioner has no specific case of malafides againsteither the Judges or the Appeal Committee. When the experts in thefield have assessed the performance of the participants and awardedmarks, this Court will not be justified in interfering with suchassessments made by them, in the absence of any vitiatingcircumstances.
5. The finding of fact made by the Appeal Committee inExhibit P4 cannot be termed as either arbitrary or perverse warrantingan interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia.
I find absolutely no merit in this Writ petition and the same isdismissed.
dsn
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…