Disposed

Reynold Prince. M (Minor) v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC3 Jan 2022WP(C)/27502/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition filed by 11th standard Scout students seeking declaration of eligibility for 'Rajya Puraskar' examination. The court accepted respondents’ assurance that they would be permitted to appear in the exam scheduled for March-April 2022.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of recording the Statement filed by the Government Pleader, as respondents have undertaken to permit the 11th standard students to appear in the examination in March-Apri

Reynold Prince. M (Minor) Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 3^RD DAY OF JANUARY 2022/13TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 27502 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 REYNOLD PRINCE M. (MINOR), S/O MUTHU & BINDU M., NARANI, KUTTIPALLAM, CHITTUR POST, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. REP. BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER BINDU M., W/O MUTHU, NARANI, KUTTIPALLAM, CHITTUR POST, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 101.

¶8

2 AKASH S. (MINOR), S/O. SURESH & ANITHA M., VAZHUVAKODE HOUSE, PATTANCHERRY P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT REP. BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER ANITHA M., W/O SURESH, VAZHUVAKODE HOUSE, PATTANCHERRY P.O., CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 532.

¶9

3 ANEESH M (MINOR), S/O MOHANAN AND PREMA N., 1/917A, THOTTIYATHARA, MUTHALAMADA POST, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. REP. BY THE NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER, PREMA N., W/O MOHANAN, 1/917A, THOTTIYATHARA, MUTHALAMADA POST, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 507.

¶10

BY ADVS. SAJAN VARGHEESE K. LIJU. M.P JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY

WP(C)No.27502/2021

RESPONDENTS:

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

¶15

2 THE STATE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES (DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCTION) JAGATHY, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-14.

¶16

3 THE STATE ORGANISING COMMISSIONER (SCOUTS) THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES, STATE HEAD QUARTERS, VIKAS BHAVAN POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶17

4 THE ASSISTANT STATE ORGAISING COMMISSIONER (SCOUTS) THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES, STATE HEADQUARTERS, VIKAS BHAVAN POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

¶18

5 THE DISTRICT ORGANISING COMMISSIONER (SCOUTS) THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES, DISTRICT HEADQUARTERS, JAMBORI BHAVAN, NEAR DISTRICT PANCHAYAT OFFICE, PALAKKAD-01.

¶19

BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.PARVATHY KOTTOL SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS, SC, SCOUTS & GUIDES

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C)No.27502/2021

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3^rd day of January, 2022

¶25

The three petitioners who are students of 11^th Standard, have approached this Court seeking to declare that the petitioners are entitled and eligible to take part in the test conducted for 'Rajya Puraskar' which may be held between 27.12.2021 and 30.12.2021 or any other period.

¶26

The petitioners are members of a Scout Group recognised by the respondents. They are studying in the 11^th Standard. The petitioners state that they are entitled to take part in the test conducted for 'Rajya Puraskar'. The candidates similarly situated have been permitted to appear in the Examination and were issuing hall tickets. The petitioner would contend that for appearing in 'Rajya Puraskar', the question as to in which Standard the candidates are studying, is irrelevant. The petitioners are

¶27

¶28

WP(C)No.27502/2021

¶29

not permitted to appear in the Examination on the ground that they are studying in 11^th Standard.

¶30

The petitioners contend that the action of the respondents in not permitting the petitioner to participate in the 'Rajya Puraskar' Examination proposed to be conducted in December, 2021, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

¶31

The learned Government Pleader appeared on behalf of respondents 1 to 5 and defends the writ petition. The respondents filed a Statement which reads as follows:

¶32

“2. It is submitted that as of now, it is decided by the 2^nd respondent that examination need be conducted only for the tenth standard students. This decision is taken with a view to control crowding in the backdrop of COVID-19 restrictions. Since the 10^th standard students can avail grace marks on the successful completion of the examination, conducting the exam at the appropriate time is necessary. This exam is therefore decided to be conducted in the month of December.

¶33

The 2^nd respondent is proposing to conduct the Rajyapuraskar exams-2022 for the 8^th and 9^th standard students in the months of March-April. Complainant, who is studying

¶34

¶35

WP(C)No.27502/2021

¶36

in the 11^th standard shall also be permitted to appear for the exam at that point in time. Hall ticket will be provided before the exam.”

¶37

The Statement further divulges that the petitioners will be permitted to appear in the Rajya Puraskar Examination, 2022 which will be in the month of March-April, 2022 along with 8^th and 9^th Standard students.

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner expressed an apprehension that the period of warrant issued to the Scoutmaster attached to the petitioners' unit, is to expire during the interregnum and unless it is extended, the petitioners may be put to difficulties in appearing in the Examination.

¶39

Since the respondents have already undertaken in the Statement dated 18.12.2021 that the petitioners who are studying in the 11^th Standard shall also be permitted to appear in the Examination to be held in the months of March-April, 2022, the apprehension of the petitioners is

unfounded.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

¶44

recording the Statement dated 18.12.2021 filed by the

¶45

Government Pleader.

¶46

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

ncd/03.01.2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27502/2021

¶51

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶52

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF CLAUSE 1 OF CHAPTER II
	OF THE AIMS , POLICY RULES AND ORGANISATION OF THE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES, INDIA.
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE ISSUED TO THE FIRST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE OBTAINED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE
	QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE ACQUIRED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE ISSUED TO SIBINKRISHNA B.
Exhibit P6	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE ISSUED TO NAVEEN VIJAY M.
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE QUALIFYING TRITIYA SOPAN BADGE ISSUED TO SYAMJITH S.
Exhibit P8	TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-2022.
Exhibit P9	TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22 ISSUED TO SIBINKRISHNA B.
Exhibit P10	TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22 ISSUED TO NAVEEN VIJAY M.
Exhibit P11	TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22 ISSUED TO SYAMJITH S.
Exhibit P12	TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FORM FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER NO.1.

¶53

¶54

¶55

Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FORM FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER NO.2. Exhibit P14 TRUE COPY OF THE HALL TICKET FORM FOR RAJYA PURASKAR TEST 2021-22 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER NO.3.

Reynold Prince. M (Minor) v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reynold Prince. M (Minor) 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

Paily Abraham Vs Kerala Water Authority

Paulose Abraham Vs Kerala Water Authority

Riyasudheen K Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Muthu Vs the State of Kerala

Mariamma John Philip Vs Biju Prabhakar, IAS

Nair Service Society Vs the State of Kerala