The High Court of Kerala dismissed a writ appeal challenging the ranking in a state-level dance competition. The Court held that Article 226 does not provide an avenue to evaluate relative merit in fine arts competitions, even regarding stage conditions that may have affected the performance.
The Writ Appeal is dismissed without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013/26TH POUSHA 1934
WA.No. 90 of 2013 () IN WP(C).707/2013
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C).707/2013 DATED 08-01-2013 APPELLANT(S):
SRUTHY RAJ V. (MINOR) D/O.BABURAJ V.,VILLUDY HOUSE,VELUTHEDATHU MANNA MALAPPURAM,REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER BABURAJ V. S/O.KARAPPAN K.,VILLUDY HOUSE,VELUTHEDATHU MANNA MALAPPURAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SRI.B.PREMNATH (E)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS IN WPC 707/2013.:
1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICE COLLECTORATE,MALAPPURAM-676505.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION MALAPPURAM-676505.
3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695039.
4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER COLLECTORATE,MALAPPURAM-676505.
5. AKHILA LEXMI V. (MINOR) D/O.VENUGOPAL,SUBHASREE,KULASSERY P.O. KOPPAM
PALAKKAD REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER SRI.VENUGOPAL KOPPAM,PALAKKAD-678001.
R1 TO R4 BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.GIRIJA GOPAL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K.Vinod Chandran, J.
W.A.No.90 of 2013
Dated this, the 16th day of January, 2013
JUDGMENT
K.Vinod Chandran,J.:
The appellant before us is aggrieved by the judgment of the learned single Judge in refusing to interfere with Exhibit P1 order of the Appellate Committee, in the District Level Kalolsavam 2012-13 held in the Revenue District of Malappuram.
Writ Appeal No. 90 of 2013 : 2 :
Writ Appeal No. 90 of 2013 : 3 :
the finding of the learned Single Judge.
The Writ Appeal is dismissed, however, with no costs.
Sd/Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice
Sd/K.Vinod Chandran, Judge.
//true copy//
P.A to Judge
jma/18.01
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an inter-service adjudication in a fine arts state-level dance competition can be an appropriate subject for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution regarding uneven ranking or stag
Whether the Court can sit in extra-ordinary jurisdiction alone to evaluate relative merit in art form competitions and compare performances.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sruthy Raj (minor)
The Assistant Education Officer, Malappuram
The Deputy Director of Education, Malappuram
The Director of Public Instructions, Thiruvananthapuram
The District Educational Officer, Malappuram
Manjula Chellur
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
