Dismissed

Athira V.N. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC19 May 2009WP(C)/12888/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Students in Standard VIII sought admission to G.V.HSS Kannur, claiming they were wrongly allotted G.V.Raja Sports School, Thiruvananthapuram. The Court upheld the respondents' alternate allotment procedure, finding it fair and noting the State sponsors these residential schools completely. The petition for prerogative writs was dismissed as lacking merit.

What the court decided

AI extract

Athira V.N. and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 19TH MAY 2009 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1931

¶5

WP(C).No. 12888 of 2009(E)

PETITIONER(S):

ATHIRA.V.N., AGED 13 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER M.T.ANTONY, THANKAMANI NIVAS, PULIYANGODE, P.O.MATTANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶10

JINTU JOSEPH, AGED 13 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER SUNNY GEORGE, KALAPPURAKKAL HOUSE, MUTHAPAN PUZHA P.O., THIRUVANPADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶11

ASWATHI SASIKUMAR, AGED 12 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER SASI.N., RAMAPURAM, KUDIYAN MALA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶12

SRUTHI.M.S., AGED 14 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER SIVAN, MARATH, PULLOORAMPARA P.O., VIA THIRUVAMPADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶13

ATHIRA.N, AGED 12 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER NARAYANAN.K.K., KATHIRUKUNNU PARAMBIL, VYKATHUR, VALANCHERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

NANDHANA BABU.T., AGED 12 YEARS, MINOR REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN FATHER BABU.T., THAYYULLATHIL, P.O.KUTTAYADI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶15

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH

SRI.MOHAMMED SHAMEEL

RESPONDENT(S):

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶20

WP(C).No. 12888 of 2009

¶21

-2-

¶22

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶23

PRINCIPAL, G.V.RAJA SPORTS SCHOOL, MILAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶24

PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, SPORTS DIVISION, KANNUR.

¶25

GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 & R2 SRI.SANDESH RAJA

¶26

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/05/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶27

WP(C).No. 12888 of 2009

¶28

APPENDIX

¶29

EXT.P1TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LIST DATED 15.3.09 IN RESPECT OF GIRLS ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT

¶30

EXT.P2(a)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMO DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P2(b)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMOS DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P2(c)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMO DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 3RD PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P2(d)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMO DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 4TH PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P2(e)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMO DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 5TH PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
EXT.P2(f)-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ADMISSION MEMOS DATED 18.3.09 ISSUED TO THE 6TH PETITIONER BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT

(TRUE COPY)

P.A TO JUDGE

V.GIRI, J

W.P.(C).12888/2009

Dated this the 19^th day of May, 2009

¶36

JUDGMENT

¶37

Heard Mr.P.M.Pareeth, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Sandesh Raj, learned senior Government Pleader. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit and have moved for vacating the interim order, on the ground that the order of stay results in the entire selection to standard VIII for the year 2009-10 in two sports schools in Thiruvananthapuram and Kannur being kept in abeyance.

¶38

2. Petitioners are students selected for admission

¶39

to the Government Sports schools in Kerala, in standard VIII for the year 2009-10. It is contended that the children are selected after being subjected to rigorous Physical Efficiency test at the District, Revenue and Zonal level. Petitioners are allotted to the G.V.Raja Sports school, Thiruvananthapuram. According to them, they hail from either Kannur,

¶40

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶41

¶42

Kozhikode or Malappuram districts and it causes them hardship to be sent to G.V.Raja Sports school at Thiruvananthapuram. Had they been given an option, they would have opted for G.V.HSS (Sports Division) Kannur. Hitherto till the last year, rank No.1 to 30 among the girl students were being allotted to the school at Kannur. Had the same procedure been followed, petitioners would also have been allotted to the said school. Hence the writ petition praying for the following reliefs:-

¶43

(i). A writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ direction or order calling for the records leading to Ext.P2 series and quash the same to the extent the said documents direct the petitioners to report for admission at G.V.Raja Sports School, Thiruvananthapuram instead of G.V.HSS (sports division) Kannur to which school the petitioners are entitled to get admitted going by their ranks in Ext.P1 selection list.

¶44

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶45

¶46

(ii). A writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the 2^nd respondent to permit the petitioners and other girls in Ext.P1 list to opt the school of their choice so as to enable the 2^nd respondent to prepare separate list for admission to the schools under the third and 4^th respondents on the basis of other ranks assigned to the girls in Ext.P1 selection list.

¶47

(iii). A direction to respondents 2, 3 and 4 to keep in abeyance the admissions to sports schools under the 3^rd and 4^th respondents until separate list are prepared for both schools on the basis of the option exercised by the candidates in accordance with their ranks in Ext.P1 selection list.

¶48

A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent and it is pointed out therein that the State Government with an objective to develop the sports activities and to give sufficient

¶49

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶50

¶51

encouragement and support to the students, have established two residential sports schools, one at Kannur (GVHSS, Kannur) and another at Thiruvananthapuram (G.V.Raja Sports school). These sports schools impart academic as well as sports training at the expense of the State, and accommodation, food and other facilities are provided free of charge to the students admitted to the schools. Admission to the said schools is from standard VIII and students are selected on the basis of physical efficiency test and on the basis of their achievements in the District, Zonal and State level competitions. Separate rank list is prepared for boys and girls on the basis of selection. The Sports Division at Kannur, is meant for girls with 30 seats and G.V.Raja Sports school, Thiruvananthapuram, has facilities to admit 90 students, 60 boys and 30 girls, during the previous years. A method was earlier adopted by which girls students ranked 1 to 30, were admitted to the Kannur Sports Division and the rest were allotted to the G.V.Raja Sports

¶52

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶53

¶54

school, Thiruvananthapuram. This resulted in disparity between the students at Kannur Sports Division and G.V.Raja Sports school at Thiruvananthapuram. In so far as the girls students are concerned, rank Nos. 1 to 30, who obviously formed the best athletes, were allotted to Kannur and the G.V.Raja Sports school, Thiruvananthapuram, got only the rest. This caused resentment and ill-feeling that the G.V.Raja Sports school was being neglected. A solution was therefore, devised by which in respect of the total number of 60 girls students, 30 would be allotted to Kannur and 30 would be allotted to Thiruvananthapuram and admission would be made from the rank list on an alternate basis. Thus rank No.1 was to be allotted to Kannur Sports division and rank No.2 to G.V.Raja Sports school, Thiruvananthapuram, rank No.3 to Kannur sports Division and so on. This principle has worked out in a fair selection and that is all what has been done in this case. There is no notified selection procedure

¶55

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶56

¶57

contemplating any option to be exercised by the students on the basis of ranks.

¶58

It is admitted that there was no notified selection procedure contemplating a facility to be given to the students to opt for Kannur sports school. The students were subjected to a physical efficiency test and it is therefore, that they have been selected. What is to be remembered is that the schools are residential schools and food, accommodation and all other aspects relating to the students are taken care of by the State. The procedure now devised by the respondents, for allotment of girls students in the rank list on the basis of the rank alternatively to each of the institutions, is a fair procedure. Nor is it a case where a notified selection procedure has been changed. It is worthy of being remembered that State sponsors the studies and boarding of the students completely. State obviously must be given liberty to devise a selection procedure, which does

¶59

W.P.(C).12888/2009

¶60

¶61

not in any manner seem to be arbitrary. I also take note of the fact that none of the students, who would obviously be affected if the petitioners' prayers are accepted, have been made parties to the writ petition.

¶62

For all these reasons, I am of the view that there does not seem to be any warrant or justification for directing the respondents to allot the petitioners to the Kannur Sports Division nor is there any illegality apparent from Exts.P1 and P2. Writ petition is bereft of merit and hence, the same is dismissed.

¶63

V.GIRI, Judge

¶64

mrcs

Athira V.N. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Athira V.N. and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.K.Suresh Vs State of Kerala

P.Nisam Vs the D.E.O. and Others

The Manager, Darussalam L.P.School Vs the State of Kerala and Others

K.Sreedharan Vs State of Kerala

Nazar A.M. Vs State of Kerala, Rep. by Its Secretary

Sindhu Vs Pankajarajan