Kerala High Court
Arpith Rajagopal vs State Of Kerala on 26 August, 2021
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13763 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
YADUNANDAN M (MINOR)
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O.SURESH BABU.A,AGED 15 YEARS,HARIGOVIND
HOUSE,PUTHUKAI,
PUTHUKAI.P.O, HOSDURG,KASARGODE-671314.
REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER SURESH BABU,S/O.LATE KRISHNAN
NAIR,HARIGOVIND HOUSE,PUTHUKAI,
PUTHUKAI.P.O, HOSDURG,
KASARAGODE-671314.
BY ADVS.
PHILIP T.VARGHESE
THOMAS T.VARGHESE
ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
V.T.LITHA
K.R.MONISHA
SHRUTHI SARA JACOB
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT
OF GENERAL EDUCATION,GOVENMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF EXAMINATIONS,
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF EXAMINATIONS,PARIKSHA
BHAVAN,
POOJAPURA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012.
4 THE STATE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF BHARAT SCOUTS AND
GUIDES(DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION),
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 2
JAGATHY,POOJAPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
5 THE STATE ORGANISER AND COMMISSIONER,
THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES,STATE
HEADQUARTERS,
VIKAS BHAVAN POST,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033.
6 THE HEAD MASTER,
GOVERNMENT HIGH SECONDARY SCHOOL,KAKKAT,BANGALAM.P.O,
VIA NILESHWAR,MADIKKAI VILLAGE,
KASARAGODE-671314.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13378/2021, 13396/2021 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13378 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
ABIN VINOD A
AGED 18 YEARS
ASSARIVILLA HOUSE, KUTTUMUKKU, RAMAVARMAPURAM P.O,
THRISSUR - 680631.
BY ADVS.
LINDONS C.DAVIS
E.U.DHANYA
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695014.
3 NATIONAL SERVICE SCHEME
HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001, REPRESENTED
BY ITS PROGRAM COORDINATOR.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13396 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
FAZEEH RAHMAN (MINOR)
AGED 16 YEARS
S/O. SIDHEEQUE MADATHIL, ELLANGAL VEEDU,NELLIKKAPARAMBA
P.O, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE 673 602 REPRESENTED BY HIS
FATHER SIDHEEQUE MADATHIL, AGED 44, S/O. MAYINMADATHIL,
ELLANGALVEEDU, NELLIKKAPARAMBA P.O, MUKKAM, KOZHIKODE -
673 602
BY ADVS.
SAIJO HASSAN
P.PARVATHY
RAFEEK. V.K.
BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
MANAS P.HAMEED
RESPONDENTS:
1 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, 3RD FLOOR, ANNEX II,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
2 DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014
3 DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
4 KERALA PAREEKSHA BHAVAN,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POOJAPPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 012
5 STATE COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND
TRAINING (SCERT KERALA) REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
VIDYABHAVAN, POOJAPPURA P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 012
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 5
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13709 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 ARPITH RAJAGOPAL,
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O. MANOJ RAJAGOPAL,
RESIDING AT LEKSHMI NIVAS, KANKATHUMUKKU,
THIRUMULLAVARAM P.O. KOLLAM 12 (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY
THE GUARDIAN SRI. MANOJ RAJAGOPAL.
2 JATHAVED B.,
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O. BALAMURALI N., RESIDING AT EDAMANA ILLOM,
MANIKANTESWARAM P.O. PEROORKADA TRIVANDRUM - 13.
(MINOR) REPRESENTED BY THE GUARDIAN SRI. BALAMURALI N.
3 V ABHIJITH,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. VIJAYAKUMAR N RESIDING AT SREEPATHAM, SNEHA NAGAR
286, AYATHIL P.O. KOLLAM 21.
4 A S DEVADUTH
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. ANIL KUMAR, RESIDING AT PUTHUVAL PUTHEN VEEDU, SNC
JUNCTION, KOLLAM 01.
5 ABHISHEK S.,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. SUNIL KUMAR P., RESIDING AT KOTHARA VADKKATHIL
VARADHEKSHINA, SOUHRIDA NAGAR 259, ERVIPURAM P.O.
KOLLAM 11.
6 A SHAHUL,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. J ABDUL KALAM, RESIDING AT SHAHUL COTTAGE IKYA
NAGAR, PALLIMUKKU, VADAKKEVILA P.O KOLLAM - 10
7 ABHINAV M S,
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O. SREEJA L, RESIDING AT KAVAD KIZHAKKATTHIL,
KAVADIPURAM NAGAR 62, ASRAMAM P.O. KOLLAM - 02 (MINOR)
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 7
REPRESENTED BY THE GUARDIAN SREEJA L.
BY ADV J.S.AJITHKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL, GENERAL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
695 001.
2 THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
THE DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, DPI JUNCTION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13820 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
KERALA STUDENTS UNION(KSU)
STATE COMMITTEE, INDHIRA BHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM
P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 0101, REPRESENTED BY THE
STATE SECRETARY. P.H.ASLAM, AGED 29, S/O P.M. HANEEFA,
PANDIYALAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KUNNUSSERY, ATHANI P.O.
ERNAKULAM-683 585.
BY ADVS.
GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
MANAS P HAMEED
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
EDUCATION, 3RD FLOOR , ANNEX 11, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3 DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
4 KERALA PAREEKSHA BHAVAN,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POOJAPPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 012.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13881 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 ANTONY JOSEPH JOYAL
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. K.A FRANCIS, KOTTACKAL HOUSE, PALLURUTHY P.O,
KOCHI 682 006
2 NIKHITHA GORDEN
AGED 18 YEARS
D/O. E.G GORDEN, EZHUTHAIKKAL HOUSE, KUMBALANGII,
KOCHI 682 007
BY ADVS.
PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH
K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR
VANDANA MENON
VIMAL VIJAY
RESPONDENTS:
1 DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, ANNEX II,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
2 DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014
3 DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
4 KERALA PAREEKSHA BHAVAN
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,POOJAPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 012
5 NATIONAL SERVICE SCHEME
DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED
BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 10
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 11
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 13972 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
MUHAMMED MURSHID,
AGED 18 YEARS
STUDENT & N.S.S. LEADER, PMSAMA HIGHER SECONDARY
SCHOOL, CHEMMAKADAVU, S/O.ABDUL MAJEED, MURUNGATHODAN
HOUSE, CHOLAKKAL, KODUR P.O., MALAPPURAM-676 504.
BY ADVS.
P.E.SAJAL
S.KABEER
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
EDUCATION (C) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
3 THE COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS,
PAREEKSHA BHAVAN, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695
012.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 12
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14112 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 SIVAPRADEESH M.,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. MAHADEVAN C., GANAPATHY, ANUGRAKHA, NEAR
VANITHA SOCIETY, NELLIMOODU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 524.
2 JIBIN JOY,
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. JOY D., KAMALA BHAVAN, NELLIMOODU P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695524.
3 ANUGRAH S.S.,
AGED 19 YEARS
S/O. SUNIL KUMAR V., SUNILBHAVAN, KURIPARACHA,
NELLIMOODU P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695524.
BY ADVS.
SAIJO HASSAN
BENOJ C AUGUSTIN
RAFEEK. V.K.
P.PARVATHY
AATHIRA SUNNY
MANAS P HAMEED
NASEEBA K.T.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
EDUCATION, 3RD FLOOR, ANNEX II, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 13
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
3 DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD
BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
4 KERALA PAREEKSHA BHAVAN,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POOJAPPURA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695012.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26.08.2021,ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 4TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14884 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 RISHIKESH MANOJ (MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O. K.V MANOJ KUMAR, LAKSHMI, CHAVANAPUZHA, KARIMBAM
P.O, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 142
THROUGH FATHER K.V MANOJ KUMAR, AGED 49 , S/O. M.
ACHUTHA MENON, LAKSHMI, CHAVANAPUZHA, KARIMBAM P.O,
TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 142
2 RITHWIN MANOJ(MINOR)
AGED 16, S/O. K.V MANOJ KUMAR, LAKSHMI, CHAVANAPUZHA,
KARIMBAM P.O, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 142
THROUGH FATHER K.V MANOJ KUMAR, AGED 49 , S/O. M.
ACHUTHA MENON, LAKSHMI, CHAVANAPUZHA, KARIMBAM P.O,
TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 142
BY ADV K. REMIYA RAMACHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL
EDUCATION, 3RD FLOOR, ANNEX II, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, JAGATHI,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014
3 DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
4 KERALA PAREEKSHA BHAVAN
REPRESENTED BY BY ITS SECRETARY, POOJAPPURA,
THIRUVANATHAPURAM 695 012
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).13763/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 15
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P.CHALY, J.
The captioned writ petitions are materially connected in respect of a
communication dated 29/6/2021 issued by the Additional Secretary to State
Government, General Education Department, to the Director, Public Education
Department, Thiruvananthapuram informing that the State Government have
decided not to award grace marks for the general examinations in the academic
year 2020-2021 for the S.S.L.C & Plus Two examinations, to the students
participated in extracurricular activities through Scouts and Guides, Student Police
Cadet, National Cadet Corps, Junior Red Cross and National Service Scheme. We
are of the opinion that though a common question arises for consideration, in order
to avoid any confusion the reliefs sought for in the writ petitions are briefly
narrated.
2. W.P.(C) No.13820/2021 is a Public Interest Litigation filed by Kerala
Students' Union, a students' organisation said to be formed for upholding and
protecting the rights of the students, seeking direction to the State and the
Education Department to continue with the policy of awarding of grace marks for
S.S.L.C and Plus Two examinations in the academic year 2020-2021.
3. W.P.(C)No.13396/2021 is filed by a minor student seeking a writ of
mandamus to call for the records leading to Exhibit P2 Government Communication
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 16
dated 29/6/2021 withdrawing the grace marks and seeking direction to the State
and its officials to declare that the students who have participated in the extra
curricular activities specified above cannot be deprived of grace marks in S.S.L.C
or Plus Two since they have actively participated in COVID prevention works during
the year 2020-2021.
4. W.P.(C) No.13378/2021 is filed by a Plus Two student seeking to quash
the Government Communication specified above dated 29.6.2021 and for a
direction to the respondents to grant 2% grace marks since he was a NSS
volunteer having NSS certificate by virtue of Exhibit P1 Government Order dated
27.5.2009 issued by the Government of Kerala bearing No.GO(MS)43/2009/H.Edn.,
whereby grace marks are offered to NSS volunteers having NSS certificates, NSS
volunteers attended national camps and NSS volunteers attended Republic Day
camps at the rate of 2%, 3% and 5% respectively.
5. W.P.(C) No.13709/2021 is filed by two Plus Two students seeking to quash
Government Communication specified above withdrawing grace marks, and for a
further direction to grant grace marks at 3% since they have participated in the
activities of Scouts & Guides and NSS by virtue of a Government Order dated
11/1/2016.
6. W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 is filed by a S.S.L.C student claiming grace
marks on account of participation in Bharat Scouts and Guides activities apart from
seeking to quash the Government communication withdrawing grace marks.
7. W.P.(C) No.13881 of 2021 is filed by a Plus Two student seeking 2% grace
marks on the basis of NSS certificate.
8. W.P.(C) No.13972 of 2021 is filed by a Plus Two student claiming 2%
grace marks on the basis of NSS certificate.
9. W.P.(C) No.14112 of 2021 is filed by a Plus Two student claiming grace
marks on the basis of participation in the Scouts Unit apart from challenging the
Government Order withdrawing the grace marks.
10. W.P.(C) No.14884 of 2021 is filed by two Plus Two students claiming
grace marks on the basis of participation in the Scouts & Guides and NCC
respectively.
11. The State Government has filed a statement and an additional statement
refuting the claims raised by the petitioners. According to the Government, grace
marks are awarded to students who have participated in extracurricular activities in
schools so as to help them to cope up with the educational hours lost consequent
to participation in such extracurricular activities and thus to support them to come
up with such talents during their school days. However, during the academic year
2020-2021 there were no regular classes in the State due to COVID-19 pandemic
and consequent to which, there was no loss of education hours for the students as
that of the normal times while conducting physical classes. It is also submitted that
in view of COVID-19 pandemic Education Department did not conduct any Sports
Events, Kalolsavam, Sastrolsavam, Work Experience Mela and IT Fair during the
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 18
academic year 2020-2021 and it has been a policy decision not to award grace
marks to students generally during the current academic year since there was no
regular classes, and therefore, according to the State, there is no loss of education
hours suffered by the students.
12. That apart it is stated that the Government could view the student
community as a whole and cannot take partisan decisions in the matter of grant of
grace marks. It is also the case of the Government that the Government Orders
relied upon by the petitioners claiming grace marks were issued with the avowed
object of protecting the interest of the students who are unable to attend classes
due to the participation in such extracurricular activities. It is also its submission
that the percentage of the result during the current academic year for S.S.L.C
examination is 99.47 compared to the percentage of 98.82 in the previous year.
The number of students who have secured A plus grade is 1,21,318 in the place of
41,906 during the previous academic year which according to the Government, is
after adding the grace marks. Therefore, the submission is that the students could
perform in their examination in a much better manner than the previous year.
13. That apart it is further submitted that the students could come out with
more flying colours due to the fact that the General Education Department took
stock of the entire situation prior to the conduct of the examination and the plight
of the students who did not have the opportunity to be a part of regular classes in
view of the pandemic, and accordingly, it was decided to form an examination
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 19
pattern in order to suit the situations prevailing and thus, focus areas were decided
to each subject, and 60% of the questions were taken from the said focus area.
Further the total mark was doubled by increasing the number of questions without
restricting internal choice and the students were given the option to answer any or
all questions without any internal choice restriction. Thus, according to the
Government, the Education Department proactively joined hands with the students
to cope up with the potential problems faced by the students for the examinations
during the academic year 2020-2021 and the deficiency due to want of regular
classes and loss of opportunity to secure grace marks were averted by the timely
intervention of the department. Therefore, by the said pattern of question paper
setting, students could attain top grades or full marks in each subject even without
grace marks and accordingly, the decision not to award grace marks during the
current academic year has not affected the student community at all and the
grievances highlighted in the writ petitions are unsustainable.
14. However, students holding certificates of NCC with 75% attendance,
Student Police Cadet, Scouts & Guides (recipient of Rastrapathi Puraskar/Rajya
Puraskar etc. would get bonus points and thus get priority at the time of their
admission to Higher Secondary courses and accordingly, the interests of the
students are safeguarded largely and substantially.
15. An additional statement is filed explaining how the bonus point is
counted for the purpose, which reads thus:
"As per the prospectus for Single Window system for admission to Plus one
course, the eligibility for bonus points is detailed as follows:
Eligibility for bonus points
Category Bonus Point
(legally adopted children also are
eligible
personnel (army, navy, air force only)
(legally adopted children also are
eligible)
attendance is required), Scout & Guide
(Recipients of Rashtrapati Puraskar/
Rajya Puraskar only)/ Proficiency in
Swimming (Certificate issued by the
Sports Council under the resident local
body of the applicant is required),
Students Police Cadet (as stipulated in
G.O.No.214/2012/Home dated
4/8/2012)
does not have either Govt. Or Aided
HSS but seeks admission in schools of
the same Taluk
Examination Kerala State Syallabus)
The above list of eligible category of students would show that the students
belonging to the above organizations like N.C.C etc. are one among the other category of
students scheduled therein entitled to bonus points in the process of admission to Higher
Secondary Courses.
3. Further, it is submitted that the eligibility for admission to the Higher Secondary
Courses is determined by calculating the WGPA (Weighted Grade Point Average) of the
students. The method of calculation of WGPA is as shown below.
First of all, grade points are given to the grades obtained by the applicant for each
subject in the qualifying examination as indicated below.
Grade A+ A B+ B C+ C D+
Grade 9 8 7 6 5 4 3
Point
Total Grade Point (TGP) is calculated by adding the grade points obtained for each
subject (Eg: the TGP of a candidate who has been awarded A+ grade for all the 10
subjects is 90).
The candidates are eligible for weightage points for some subjects in the qualifying
examination depending on the course combination they are opting for. Weightage
is given to the subjects in 10th Standard which are the same or allied with the
subjects in the course combination opted by the candidate.
The total grade points of weightage subjects is calculated separately. It is indicated
by the abbreviation GSW (total Grade value of Subjects for which Weightage is
given).
Bonus points (BP) as detailed in Para 3 above, if applicable, are calculated. Minus
Points (MP), if any, are also reckoned.
WGPA is calculated using the formula given below limiting the sum total to seven
decimal points.
WGPA =TGP+GSW + BP - MP
TS + TSW 10
Expansion of the formula is as follows:
WGPA : Weighted Grade Point Average
TGP: Total Grade Value of Subjects for which Weightage is given
BP: Bonus Point
MP: Minus Point
TS : Total no. of Subjects
TSW : Total no. of Subjects for which Weightage is given
In order to demonstrate the calculation of the WGPA, an example is given under :
Grades of the candidate
Sub MalI MalII Eng Hindi Phy Chem Bio SS Maths IT
Grade A A A A+ A+ A B+ A+ A+ A
Grade 8 8 8 9 9 8 7 9 9 8
point
Option of the Candidate : Combination with subjects Physics, Chemistry, Maths,
Biology (Course Code : 1)
TGP = 83, GSW = 33, BP = 2, MP = 0, TS 10, TSW=4
WGPA = 83+33 + 2 = 8.4857143
10 + 4 10
4. It is submitted that in the case of award of grace mark, the grace mark is
added to the marks obtained in the academic level and thus the total mark obtained
in the examination is raised which may result in change of grades in the final result,
as reflected in the school leaving certificate. Whereas the bonus point is added to the
grade value obtained in the examination at the time of admission to Higher
Secondary Courses and the students belonging to Categories mentioned in the
schedule above will get priority in admission to Higher Courses."
Therefore, according to the Government, the petitioners are not entitled to get the
reliefs as are sought for by them.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 23
16. We have heard, learned counsel for petitioners Sri.Manas P.Hameed,
Sri.Rafeeq.V.K., Sri.Lindons C. Davis, Sri.Philip T.Varghese, Sri.P.E.Sajal and
Sri.Jayesh Mohan Kumar, Smt.K.Remiya Ramachandran, Sri.J.S.Ajith Kumar,
learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish Kumar for the respondents, and
perused the pleadings and materials on record.
17. Learned counsel for petitioners basically relied upon the Government
Orders issued by the State Government awarding grace marks to the students who
participate in the extracurricular activities mentioned above and submitted that
such benefits provided as per Government Orders cannot be withdrawn by a mere
communication issued by an additional Secretary. It was also pointed out that the
Government Orders were issued by exercising the powers conferred under Article
162 of the Constitution of India, which was a policy decision and therefore, the
Additional Secretary to the Government cannot issue a communication and
withdraw the benefits granted by the State Government.
18. One of the learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the Apex
Court in Navajyothy Coo-Group Housing Society v. Union of India and
Others [(1992) 4 SCC 477] and specifically paragraph 15 to canvass a point that
such group of students were having a legitimate expectation of securing grace
marks, which reads thus:
"15. It also appears to us that in any event the new policy decision as
contained in the impugned memorandum of January 20, 1990 should not have
been implemented without making such change in the existing criterion for
allotment known to the Group Housing Societies if necessary by way of a public
notice so that they might make proper representation to the concerned
authorities for consideration of their viewpoints. Even assuming that in the
absence of any explanation of the expression "first come first served" in Rule
6(vi) of Nazul Rules there was no statutory requirement to make allotment with
reference to date of registration, it has been rightly held, as a matter of fact, by
the High Court that prior to the new guideline contained in the memo of January
20, 1990 the principle for allotment had always been on the basis of date of
registration and not the date of approval of the list of members. In the brochure
issued in 1982 by the DDA even after Gazette notification of Nazul Rules on
September 26, 1981 the policy of allotment on the basis of seniority in
registration was clearly indicated. In the aforesaid facts, the Group Housing
Societies were entitled to 'legitimate expectation' of following consistent past
practice in the matter of allotment, even though they may not have any legal
right in private law to receive such treatment. The existence of 'legitimate
expectation' may have a number of different consequences and one of such
consequences is that the authority ought not to act to defeat the 'legitimate
expectation' without some overriding reason of public policy to justify its doing
so. In a case of 'legitimate expectation' if the authority proposes to defeat a
person's 'legitimate expectation' it should afford him an opportunity to make
representations in the matter. In this connection reference may be made to the
discussions on 'legitimate expectation' at page 151 of Volume 1(1) of Halsbury's
Laws of England, 4th edn. (re-issue). We may also refer to a decision of the
House of Lords in Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil
Service [(1984) 3 All ER 935] . It has been held in the said decision that an
aggrieved person was entitled to judicial review if he could show that a decision
of the public authority affected him of some benefit or advantage which in the
past he had been permitted to enjoy and which he legitimately expected to be
permitted to continue to enjoy either until he was given reasons for withdrawal
and the opportunity to comment on such reasons. "
19. The basic contention advanced on the basis of the said judgment of the
Apex Court was that the eligible students had a legitimate expectation while
participating in the examinations that they are entitled to the benefits of the
government orders providing grace marks which cannot be withdrawn after the
examinations are over. So also the judgment of the Apex Court in Union of India
v.Dinesh Engineering Corporation and Another [(2001)8 SCC 491] was relied
upon to contend that the policy framed taking into account all relevant facts cannot
be withdrawn by issuing a mere communication. Paragraph 12 reads thus :
"12. A perusal of the said letter shows that the Board adopted this policy
keeping in mind the need to assure reliability and quality performance of the
governors and their spare parts in the context of sophistication, complexity and
high degree of precision associated with governors. It is in this background that
in para (i) the letter states that the spares should be procured on a proprietary
basis from EDC. This policy proceeds on the hypothesis that there is no other
supplier in the country who is competent enough to supply the spares required
for the governors used by the Indian Railways without taking into consideration
the fact that the writ petitioner has been supplying these spare parts for the last
over 17 years to various divisions of the Indian Railways which fact has been
established by the writ petitioner from the material produced both before the
High Court and this Court and which fact has been accepted by the High Court.
This clearly establishes the fact that the decision of the Board as found in the
letter dated 23-10-1992 suffers from the vice of non-application of mind. On
behalf of the appellants, it has been very seriously contended before us that the
decision vide letter dated 23-10-1992 being in the nature of a policy decision, it
is not open to courts to interfere since policies are normally formulated by
experts on the subjects and the courts not being in a position to step into the
shoes of the experts, cannot interfere with such policy matters. There is no
doubt that this Court has held in more than one case that where the decision of
the authority is in regard to a policy matter, this Court will not ordinarily interfere
since these policy matters are taken based on expert knowledge of the persons
concerned and courts are normally not equipped to question the correctness of a
policy decision. But then this does not mean that the courts have to abdicate
their right to scrutinise whether the policy in question is formulated keeping in
mind all the relevant facts and the said policy can be held to be beyond the pale
of discrimination or unreasonableness, bearing in mind the material on record. It
is with this limited object if we scrutinise the policy reflected in the letter dated
23-10-1992, it is seen that the Railways took the decision to create a monopoly
on proprietary basis on EDC on the ground that the spares required by it for
replacement in the governors used by the Railways required a high degree of
sophistication, complexity and precision, and in the background of the fact that
there was no party other than EDC which could supply such spares. There can
be no doubt that an equipment of the nature of a spare part of a governor which
is used to control the speed in a diesel locomotive should be a quality product
which can adhere to the strict scrutiny/standards of the Railways, but then the
pertinent question is: has the Board taken into consideration the availability or
non-availability of such characteristics in the spare parts supplied by the writ
petitioner or, for that matter, was the Board alive to the fact that like EDC the
writ petitioner was also supplying the spare parts as the replacement parts for
the GE governors for the last over 17 years to the various divisions of the
Railways? A perusal of the letter dated 23-10-1992 does not show that the Board
was either aware of the existence of the writ petitioner or its capacity or
otherwise to supply the spare parts required by the Railways for replacement in
the governors used by it, an ignorance which is fatal to its policy decision. Any
decision, be it a simple administrative decision or a policy decision, if taken
without considering the relevant facts, can only be termed as an arbitrary
decision. If it is so, then be it a policy decision or otherwise, it will be violative of
the mandate of Article 14 of the Constitution. "
20. On the other hand, learned Senior Government Pleader apart from
advancing arguments on the basis of the statements, relied upon the judgment of
the Apex Court in Centre for Public Interest Litigation and Others v.Union
of India and Others [(2012) 3 SCC 1] in the matter of the formulation of policy
by the Government against public interest. The relevant paragraph reads thus:
"99. In majority of the judgments relied upon by the learned Attorney General
and the learned counsel for the respondents, it has been held that the power of
judicial review should be exercised with great care and circumspection and the
Court should not ordinarily interfere with the policy decisions of the Government
in financial matters. There cannot be any quarrel with the proposition that the
Court cannot substitute its opinion for the one formed by the experts in the
particular field and due respect should be given to the wisdom of those who are
entrusted with the task of framing the policies. We are also conscious of the fact
that the Court should not interfere with the fiscal policies of the State. However,
when it is clearly demonstrated that the policy framed by the State or its
agency/instrumentality and/or its implementation is contrary to public interest or
is violative of the constitutional principles, it is the duty of the Court to exercise
its jurisdiction in larger public interest and reject the stock plea of the State that
the scope of judicial review should not be exceeded beyond the recognised
parameters."
21. So also the judgment of a learned single Judge of this court in Rajesh
and another v. State of Kerala and others [(1998)KHC 282] was relied upon to
contend that the grace marks cannot be claimed as a matter of right. Learned
Government Pleader has also relied upon judgment of the learned single Judge in
Abhishek T.M. and Others v. State of Kerala and others [2020 (5) KHC 578]
whereby in the realm of sports quota candidates it was held that grace marks are
granted by way of an encouragement and it cannot be claimed as a vested right
and further that Government decides marks based on the recommendations of
expert bodies and thus, the Government is vested with ample powers to modify or
amend or alter the prospectus. Yet another judgment of a learned single Judge in
Jamshid Jamal K.J. v. General Education Department, Tvm. And Others
[2014(2)KHC 736] was pressed into service by the learned Senior Government
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 29
Pleader to canvass the proposition that the policy decision of the Government in
the matter of modification of grace marks in the middle of the academic year
cannot be said as arbitrary.
22. Learned counsel for petitioners have also invited our attention to rule 10
of Chapter VIII of Kerala Education Rules dealing with extracurricular activities and
submitted that such activities by virtue of the rule should form an integral part of
education imparted in the school and the Headmaster and teachers should devote
a definite time to such activities, and therefore in the best interest of the
students,it is inevitable that the grace marks are awarded.
23. We have evaluated the rival submissions made across the Bar. The sole
question that emerges for consideration is, whether any interference is required in
the matter of withdrawal of grace marks for the academic year 2020-2021 ? Even
though learned counsel for petitioners have submitted that a policy decision of the
Government can only be withdrawn by yet another Government Order issued
under Article 162 of the Constitution of India, we are of the considered opinion that
the communication was issued by the Additional Secretary to the Education
Department on the basis of a policy decision taken by Government to withdraw the
grace marks for various reasons including the fact that during the academic year
2020-2021 there was no organised extracurricular activities due to the COVID-19
pandemic, which is an admitted fact. Further, there is no dispute for any of the
learned counsel for petitioners that the education was imparted during the
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 30
academic year through online in view of the safety measures adopted by the
Central and State Governments to prevent the spread of COVID-19 disease. It is
also an admitted fact that there was no occasion for the students to lose the
educational hours in the absence of any activities due to the restrictions imposed
by the Government. It is clear from the Government Orders relied upon by the
petitioners that the State Government has decided to award grace marks to
compensate the working hours lost by such students, which is undoubtedly the
basic and foundational criteria for awarding the grace marks. Therefore once it is
established that the students could not participate in such extracurricular activities,
the foundation of the Government Orders guiding the field would vanish dis-
entitling the beneficiaries to secure the grace marks. Which thus also means the
substratum of the Government Orders relied upon by the petitioners was not
existing for want of educational hours. Moreover going by the principles of law
enunciated by the Apex Court and the judgments rendered by the learned single
Judges of this Court, it is clear that the petitioners are not entitled to harp up on
the policy decision of the Government since grace mark is a concession extended
by the Government under certain specific and dedicated circumstances, and in
absentia of such eventualities the Government was justified in withdrawing the
grace marks.
24. We have also evaluated the circumstances leading to the extraordinary
results of the terminal examinations and the manner in which the question papers
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 31
were set taking into account the present precarious situations of the pandemic.
Therefore, indeed the State Government was conscious of the difficulties faced by
the student community as a whole without carving out any exception, and viewed
in those circumstances we are of the view that the Government was right in taking
the decision not to grant grace marks. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was
any arbitrary, illegal or unfair action on the part of the Government in withdrawing
the benefit extended to the students. There is no case for the petitioners that there
was any malafide intention to withdraw the concession of grace marks offered to
the students participating in the extracurricular activities in question. Moreover, we
are also the considered opinion that the pass percentage and the marks secured by
the students in the academic year 2020-2021 would clearly show that such high
marks and percentage could be secured due to the peculiar examination pattern
adopted by the Government referred to in the discussions made above, which in
our considered opinion, was taking into account the difficulties faced the student
community as a whole consequent to the pandemic and with the bonafide intention
of helping them to withstand the extraordinary situation .
25. Above all these aspects, the State Government have decided to provide
bonus marks to the specific class of students while they are seeking admission to
higher classes in the pattern and formula discussed, and in that view of the matter
also, it can never be said that any manner of prejudice is caused to such students,
who were entitled to secure the benefits of the Government Orders . Moreover, it
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 32
is for the Government to decide the manner in which the interests of such students
are to be protected and once their admissions to higher classes are taken care of
by awarding bonus marks no manner of illegality or arbitrariness can be imputed
against the State especially due to the fact that it is for the State to take stock of
the situation prevailing and act accordingly so as to avoid any arbitrariness among
the student community. This we say also bearing in mind the fact that the the
State could achieve very high percentage of pass and high marks when compared
to the previous academic year and therefore, if any further marks are awarded to a
smaller group of student community, it may seriously prejudice the other larger
student community, competing for higher studies on the basis of marks alone. It is
also worthwhile to note that the grace marks were withdrawn only for the
academic year 2020-2021.
Deducing the facts, law and circumstances, we have no hesitation to hold
that the petitioners are not entitled to get any reliefs as are sought in the writ
petitions. Needless to say, writ petitions fail, and accordingly they are dismissed.
Sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
smv JUDGE
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 33
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13378/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF GO (MS) NO.43/2009/HEDN DATED
27.5.2009
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES SHOWING THE GRACE
MARKS OFFERED TO NSS VOLUNTEERS WORK BOOKS
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.G/1055/2021/G.EDN
DATED 29-06-2021 COMMUNICATED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.176/95/G.EDN DATED
02.06.1995
ANNEXURE R2(b) TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE
R2(a)
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 34
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13396/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 LIST SHOWING THE NAMES OF 115 STUDENTS OF
PTMHS KODIYATHUR WHO WERE AWARDED
RAJYAPURASKAR IN THE YEAR 2021
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NUMBERED AS
G/1055/2021/G.ED DATED 29-06-2021
COMMUNICATED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3(A) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF
MATHRUBHUMI.COM DATED 14-05-2021 REGARDING
NCC CADETS JOING COVID DUTY IN PATHANAMTHITTA
AND KOTTAYAM
Exhibit P3(B) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF TIMES OF
INDIA REGARDING SWANTHANAM PROJECT OF JRC OF
RAMAMANGALAM HIGH SCHOOL IN ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT
Exhibit P3(C) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF THE HINDU
WITH HEADER NCC CADETS HELP POLICE REGULATE
HARBOUR WORK DATED 06-05-2020
Exhibit P4 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE WORKS OF SCOUTS
AND GUIDES OF PTMHS KODIYATHUR DURING THE
LOCKDOWN
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF PAPER REPORT DATED 01-07-2021 OF
DEEPIKA DAILY
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 01-07-2021
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 35
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13709/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE ORDER (K) NO. 11/2016 GE DTD
11.01.2016 OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G/1055/2021
/G.EDN DATED 29/06/2021.
Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER
DATED 01/07/2021 TO THE FIRST AND SECOND
RESPONDENTS.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 36
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13820/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NUMBERED AS
G/1055/2021/G.ED DATED 29.6.201 COMMUNICATED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION, ALONG WITH
ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Exhibit P2(A) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF
MATHRUBHUMI DATED 14.5.2021 REGARDING NCC
CADETS JOINING COVID DUTY IN PATHANAMTHITTA
AND KOTTAYAM
Exhibit P2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF TIMES
OF INDIA REGARDING SWANTHANAM PROJECT OF JRC
OF RAMAMANGALAM HIGH SCHOOL IN ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT DATED 18.5.2021
Exhibit P2(C) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF THE HINDU
WITH HEADER NCC CADETS HELP POLICE REGULATE
HARBOR WORK DATED 6.5.2020
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 1.7.2021
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN PHILIP XAVIER
ANTONY VS VICE CHANCELLOR, MG UNIVERSITY KTYM
& ORS CITED AS 2017 (50 KHC 992.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.176/95/G.EDN DATED
02.06.1995
ANNEXURE R2(b) TRUE COPY OF ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE
R2(a)
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 37
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13881/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE SHWOING THE
DETAILS OF AWARDING OF GRACE MARKS FOR THE
STUDENTS WHO ARE REGISTERED WITH NSS.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NSS
DIARY SHOWING THE ACTIVITIES COMPLETED BY THE
1ST PETITIONER DURING 2020-2021
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NSS
DIARY SHOWING THE ACTIVITIES COMPLETED BY THE
2ND PETITIONER DURING 2020-2021
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACTIVITIES
CARRIED OUT BY PETITIONERS AND OTHER NSS
VOLUNTEERS DURING THE COVID PANDEMIC
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE NSS DIARY
OF THE 1ST PETITIONER
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST PAGE OF THE NSS DIARY
OF THE 2ND PETITIONER.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NSS
DIARY OF THE 1ST PETITIONER, WHICH SHOWS THAT
1ST PETITIONER COMPLETED REQUIRED HOURS FOR
NSS CERTIFICATE AND FOR GRACE MARK
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE NSS
DIARY OF THE 2ND PETITIONER, WHICH SHOWS THAT
2ND PETITIONER COMPLETED REQUIRED HOURS FOR
NSS CERTIFICATE AND FOR GRACE MARK
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29-06-
2021 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 05-07-2021 WITH
POSTAL RECEIPT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 05-07-2021 WITH
POSTAL RECEIPT BEFORE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION
Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 05-07-2021 WITH
POSTAL RECEIPT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 05-07-2021 WITH
POSTAL RECEIPT BEFORE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 38
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13972/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
30.07.2019.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE
NEWS MATHRUBHUMI DAILY.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM APPEARED IN THE
MATHRUBHUMI NEWS DAILY DATED 28.05.2020.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.43/2009/H.EDN.
DATED 27.05.2009.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 01.02.2012
ISSUED BY THE NSS CELL.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
29.06.2021 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO
THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON
02.07.2021.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 39
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14884/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NUMBERED AS
G/1055/2021/G.ED DATED 29-06-2021
COMMUNICATED BY THE THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE
2ND RESPONDENT DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL
EDUCATION ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF CERTIIFCATE DATED 31-12-2020
ISSUED BY KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND
GUIDES FOR THE COMPLETION OF PLASTIC TIDE
TURNERS CHALLANGE, A GLOBAL YOUTH MOVEMENT TO
FIGHT PLASTIC
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF CERTIIFICATE DATED 31-12-2020
ISSUED BY KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND
GUIDES, TALIPARAMBA DISTRICT ASSOCIATION
CERTIFYING THAT THE 1ST PETITIONER HAS
QUALIFIED DWITIYA SOPAN BADGE
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF SSLC EXAMINATION RESULT OF THE
SECOND PETITIONER.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 40
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13763/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SSLC ADMISSION TICKET ISSUED TO
THE PETITIONER BEARING REGISTER NUMBER 606155
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF RAJYA PURASKAR CERTIFICATE
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 10.02.2020
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR BEARING
NO.E.X/C.G.L(4)/043207/2019/C.E.G ISSUED BY
3RD RESPONDENT DATED 20.02.2020
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.G/1055/2021/PUB.INFO
DATED 29.06.2021 ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 41
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14112/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE SCHOOL IDENTITY CARD OF THE
1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE SCHOOL IDENTITY CARD OF THE
2ND PETITIONER.
Exhibit P1(C) TRUE COPY OF THE SCHOOL IDENTITY CARD OF THE
3RD PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NUMBERED AS
G/1055/2021/G.ED DATED 29/06/2021
COMMUNICATED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
ALONG WITH THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF ELIGIBLE SCOUTS FOR
THE GRACE MARKS IN HIGHER SECONDARY
EXAMINATION ISSUED BY PRINCIPAL, NEW HSS
NELLIMOOD.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
06/01/2021 INVITING APPLICATIONS FOR THE
CHIEF MINISTER'S SHIELD COMPETITION ISSUED BY
THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND GUIDES,
ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 15/03/2021
ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE BHARAT SCOUTS AND
GUIDES TO THE NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL FOR
PARTICIPATING IN THE CHIEF MINISTER'S SHIELD
COMPETITION AT DISTRICT LEVEL FOR THE YEAR
2019-2021.
Exhibit P6(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF
MATHRUBHUMI.COM DATED 14/05/2021 REGARDING
NCC CADETS JOINING COVID DUTY IN
PATHANAMTHITTA AND KOTTAYAM.
Exhibit P6(B) TRUE COPY ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF 'TIMES OF
INDIA' REGARDING 'SWANTHANAM' PROJECT OF JRC
OF RAMAMGNALAM HIGH SCHOOL IN ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT.
Exhibit P6(C) TRUE COPY OF ONLINE NEWS REPORT OF 'THE
HINDU' WITH HEADER 'NCC CADETS HELP POLICE
REGULATE HARBOR WORK' DATED 06/05/2020.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN PHILIP XAVIER
ANTONY VS VICE CHANCELLOR, MG UNIVERSITY KTYM
AND ORS. CITED AS 2017(5)KHC 992.
W.P.(C) No.13763 of 2021 & con.cases 42
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
Annexure R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. GO(MS)
NO.176/95/EDN. DATED 02/06/1995.
Annexure R2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF ABOVE
GOVERNMENT ORDER.
