Writ petition challenging rejection of appeal against school competition results dismissed. Court held that it cannot substitute its wisdom for the expert assessment of the Appellate Committee regarding technical objections and video evidence.
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 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 13TH POUSHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 53 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
HARINANDAN.B.S
AGED 15 YEARS
S/O.BREJESH VISWAM, LFHS, THRIPPALAZHIKAM, KUNDARA,
KOLLAM RESIDING AT BUNGLOWIL HOUSE, CHITTUMALA,
EASTAALLADA P.O, KIZHAKKEKALLADA, KOLLAM (MINOR)
REPRESNETED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
BREJESH VISWAM, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.VISWAMBHARAN P,
BUNGLOWIL HOUSE, CHITTUMALA, EASTAALLADA P.O,
KIZHAKKEKALLADA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691502
BY ADVS.
PRATHEESH.P
ANJANA KANNATH
RESPONDENTS:
1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 DIRECTOR GENERAL OF EDUCATION JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 6950143 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THEVALLY, KOLLAM (CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE, DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM, KOLLAM), PIN - 691009 SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE - GPTHIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 53 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner says that he and his team participated in the Revenue District Kerala School Kalolsavam 2023-24 in a particular event, but was adjudged only Rank No.2. He affirms that, as per the Manual applicable to the event in question, only the first rank holder would obtain the opportunity of moving to the next level of competition, namely the Kerala State School Kalolsavam 2023-24; and therefore, that he preferred a statutory appeal against the result before the competent Appellate Authority, which, however, has culminated in Ext.P1 order. The petitioner asserts that Ext.P1 is illegal and unlawful because, it cites no reason for the rejection of his appeal.
WP(C) NO. 53 OF 2024 3
which cannot be done while acting under writ jurisdiction.
In the afore circumstances, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
MC/6.1
WP(C) NO. 53 OF 2024 4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 53/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1
THE COPY OF ORDER NO. C2/3206/2023 DATED
03.12.2023 REJECTING THE APPEAL FILED BY
THE PETITIONER AND HIS TEAM
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can substitute its judgment for that of the statutory Appellate Committee regarding technical objections in a school competition?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Devna Sumesh v. State of KeralaRelied on¶17
Devna Sumesh v. State of Kerala [2022 KHC OnLine 8081]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Harinandan.B.S (Minor) Rep. By Father
State of Kerala
Director General of Education Jagathi
The Deputy Director of Education
Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court