Dismissed

Sachin K.P v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC27 Nov 2019WP(C)/32239/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition by a petition representing a school team challenging the Appeal Committee's decision to deny them entry to State level competitions. The team secured A Grade and first place in their category but was awarded sixth place overall. The court dismissed the petition, holding that discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 requires the decision to be arbitrary, capricious, or vitiated by

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed as without merits.

Sachin K.P Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 6TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.32239 OF 2019(D)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SACHIN K.P AGED 17 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN SMITHA.K.P., AGED 41 YEARS, LAKSHMI NIVAS, KOLATHILMEETHAL PARAMBU, NETHAJI VAYANASHALA, KANNADIKKAL, VENGARI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.P.T.SHEEJISH SMT.K.K.NESNA

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶11

2 THE GENERAL CONVENER, (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION), CALICUT REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL YOUTH FESTIVAL 20192020, CALICUT UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, THENMHIPALAM P.O., CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN-673 635.

¶12

3 THE GENERAL CONVENER, (ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS), 60TH KERALA STATE SCHOOL YOUTH FESTIVAL PROGRAMME COMMITTEE OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

¶14

WPC No.32239 of 2019

¶15

4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CALICUT, CALICUT DISTRICT, PIN-695 001.

¶16

5 APPEAL COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY IT'S CHAIRMAN, KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM, 2019-2010, REVENUE DISTRICT, THALI, KOZHIKODE, PIN-695 001.

¶17

SMT. RESHMI K N, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC No.32239 of 2019

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner along with others participated representing their school in the district level competitions conducted as part of the State School Kalolsavam for the event 'Vrindavadyam'. The team could though secure A Grade, they were awarded only sixth place for the event. Only those who secure A Grade and first place for the event are entitled to participate in the State level competitions. The petitioner, therefore, challenged the decision of the panel of judges in appeal. The appeal committee dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner in terms of Ext.P3 order. The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P3 order and hence this writ petition.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶24

In matters of this nature, according to me,

¶25

¶26

WPC No.32239 of 2019

¶27

the discretionary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution can be exercised only in exceptional cases where the impugned decision is not only arbitrary but also capricious or where the decision is vitiated by malice.

¶28

Coming to the facts, it is seen that the petitioner has challenged the decision of the panel of judges on the ground that the team has performed well. The aforesaid being the ground, I do not think that the appeal committee can be found fault with for having rejected the appeal. Further, as noted, the team of the petitioner secured only sixth place in the competition. Ext.P3 order indicates that the team of the petitioner has secured 37 marks less than the marks secured by the first place holder. In the circumstances, I am of the view that it is not a case at all for this court to interfere, in exercise of the discretionary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226

WPC No.32239 of 2019

of the Constitution.

The writ petition, in the circumstances, is

¶33

without merits and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶34

Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

WPC No.32239 of 2019

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶40

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATE WITH A GRADE, ISSUED TO PETITIONER IN LAST YEAR'S STATE LEVEL KALOLSAVAM.

¶41

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER, ALONG WITH THE RECEIPT.

¶42

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY.

¶43

EXHIBIT P4 THE COMPACT DISC CONTAINING THE TRUE VIDEO RECORDING OF THE ALLEGED INCIDENT.

¶44

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶45

//TRUE COPY//

¶46

PA TO JUDGE

¶47

Sachin K.P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin K.P v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.S. Sanal Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Sajeev Mathew and Company Vs Public Works Department

Gitanjali Kurup, Vs the Branch Manager, State Bank of India

Sarika.P.S Vs the Director of Printing

K.Muraleedharan Vs District Collector

Shamem M.S. Vs State of Kerala