Kerala High Court
Joel Raj. T (Minor) vs State Of Kerala on 21 November, 2024
Author: V.G.Arun
Bench: V.G.Arun
2024:KER:88170
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 41120 OF 2024
PETITIONERS:
1 JOEL RAJ. T (MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O RAJU JOSPEH REP BY GUARDIAN AND FATHER RAJU JOSEPH
THATTAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, VALLIYAMTHODE, VAYATHUR, KANNUR
,KERALA ,, PIN - 670705
2 ANUGRAHA MARY SANTHOSH (MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
D/O SANTHOSH SEBASTIAN REP BY GUARDIAN AND FATHER,
SANTHOSH SEBASTIAN,THANNIYIL KACHERI KADAVU,
KACHERIKKADAVU,KACHERIKKADAVU PO,AYYANKUNNU ,KANNUR
KERALA, PIN - 670706
3 SHEBA V S (MINOR)
AGED 16 YEARS
D/O SINOJ REP BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER BINI SINOJ VALAYIL
HOUSE, KUNDERI ,VAYATHUR KANNUR ,KOOTTUPUZHA KERALA, PIN
- 670706
4 VISWAJITH PRASOON (MINOR)
AGED 16 YEARS
S/O PRASOON U.V,REP BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SANDHYA
PRASOON ,ULLATHANICKAL HOUSE ,VAYATHUR ,ULIKKAL P.O
,KANNUR, PIN - 670705
5 SAKAL M JOLLY (MINOR)
AGED 16 YEARS
D/O MYTHRI SOLOMON REP BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER MYTHRI
SOLOMON, THOMBUNNAYIL ,POOVAM ,PADIYOOR ,KANNUR, PIN -
670703
WP(C).No.41120/2024
2
2024:KER:88170
6 ALBERT K S
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O SHAJAN KS, KARITHADATHIL HOUSE, KUNNOTH, VILAMANA,
KANNUR, KERALA,, PIN - 670706
7 ATHIRA T (MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
D/O MATHEW TA REP BY GUARDIAN AND FATHER MATHEW TA
THAIKKANDATHIL,NELLIKAMPOYIL ,VAYATHUR KANNUR ,KERALA,
PIN - 670705
8 IRWIN JOHNSON (MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
S/O JOHNSON KA REP BY GUARDIAN AND FATHER JOHNSON KA
KUZHIKKATTU, KANNOTH , KUYYANTHAPPARA P.O KANNUR, PIN -
670706
BY ADVS.
ADARSH KURIAN
ADITH KIRAN R.S.
K.V.PAVITHRAN
ABHILASH MATHOOR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM,
PIN - 695001
2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
OFFICER OFFICE OF THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
3 GENERAL CONVENER,
KANNUR REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM, C/O. DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 670002
WP(C).No.41120/2024
3
2024:KER:88170
4 THE APPELLATE COMMITTEE
KANNUR REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM, REPRESENTED
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 670002
5 THE APPELLATE COMMITTEE
IRITTI SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM, REPRESENTED
DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR DISTRICT,
PIN - 670002
6 THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KANNUR
DISTRICT, NEAR CIVIL STATION. KANNUR, PIN - 670002
7 ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER IRITTY,
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER KANNUR
DISTRICT, NEAR CIVIL STATION. KANNUR, PIN - 670002
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE, SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.11.2024, THE COURT ON 21.11.2024 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.41120/2024
4
2024:KER:88170
V.G.ARUN, J
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C).No.41120 of 2024
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Dated thi Dated this the 21st day of November, 2024y of
November, 2024
JUDGMENT
The petitioners participated for the item 'English
Skit' in the Iritty Sub-District Kalolsavam and could secure only
second place with A Grade. Dissatisfied with the result the
petitioners filed an appeal and the appeal committee having
failed to take a timely decision, this writ petition is filed.
2. When this writ petition was taken up for
consideration, the learned Government Pleader submitted that
an order had been passed in the appeal filed by the petitioners.
The matter was then kept aside and taken up in the afternoon
session. The learned Government Pleader made available a
copy of the order of the appeal committee, rejecting the appeal
filed by the petitioners.
2024:KER:88170
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that
the order does not reflect application of mind to the grounds
urged in the appeal. It is submitted that in their appeal, the
petitioners had specifically contended that the team's
performance was impeded by the sudden change in the timing
of the competition and the unusually large size of the stage.
Moreover, while the Kalolsavam Manual stipulates an outer
time limit of five days for deciding the appeals, the decision in
the appeal filed by the petitioners was rendered on the
eighteenth day and was not communicated to the petitioners.
It is finally submitted that taking all these factors into
consideration, the petitioners team should be allowed to
participate in the Revenue District Kalolsavam.
4. Learned Government Pleader contended that,
innumerable number of appeals are filed after each competition
item and members of the appeal committee being Government
officials, have other duties. They are also bestowed with the
duty of organising the Revenue District Kalolsavam, which
2024:KER:88170
takes place immediately after the Sub-district Kalolsavam. The
delay in deciding appeals is due to the above reasons and in the
case at hand, the appeal committee having considered and
found the petitioners' complaint to be baseless, no interference
is warranted.
5. A perusal of the order passed by the appeal committee
shows that the grounds raised in the appeal were considered.
The orders passed by a committee of this nature cannot be
expected to be having the same standard as that of judicial or
quasi judicial bodies. Further, as held by this Court in Rhomy
Chandra Mohan v. General Convener, Balakalotsavam and
Yuvajanotsavam [1992 KHC 211], this Court cannot sit in
appeals over such orders in a proceeding under Article 226. It
is also not within the province of this Court to re-assess the
merits or demerits of candidates, whose performance has been
evaluated by competent judges. In this context it will be
worthwhile to extract the following erudite exposition in
Sweety v. State of Kerala [1994 KHC 216].
2024:KER:88170
"While dealing with these cases it came to my notice that
there are functionaries like 'Judges', 'Appeal Committee',
etc. functioning under the rules framed for the conduct of
competitions. Those bodies cannot be equated with
ordinary judicial or quasi judicial bodies. As pointed out
earlier, they are purely internal bodies of the educational
institutions intended to sub- serve discipline among
students in situations where disputes are likely to occur.
The exercise of their functions is completely confined to the
field of Youth Festival where the discipline is absolutely
necessary for the proper conduct of different competitions
among the students. The decisions will have to be taken in
certain cases on the spot and I fail to see how such
decisions can be challenged in these proceedings. The
assessment of performance of the participants are made by
the 'judges'. Their wisdom and reason are final in such
internal matters of educational institutions. However as an
abundant caution the appeals are provided before the
'appeal committee' against the decision of the 'Judges'. The
decision of the 'appeal' committee' shall be accepted as
conclusive and final by the students and all others. That is
purely a matter of observance of internal discipline. This
court, according to me, will not be justified in interfering
with such assessment of performance made by the appeal
committee in their discretionary powers."
2024:KER:88170
6. Being in agreement with the above precedents and the
petitioners having failed to make out any grossly vitiating
circumstance in the evaluation of their performance, the writ
petition can only be dismissed.
7. Even though the delay in deciding the appeal is not a
sufficient reason for this Court to permit the petitioners to
participate in the Revenue District Kalolsavam, having come
across many cases in which the appeal was decided in the last
minute, this Court is constrained to express displeasure in the
manner in which the appeals are being dealt with. In this
regard, it is essential to note that the time for deciding appeals
stipulated in the Kalolsavam Manual is five days or prior to the
Revenue District Kalolsavam, whichever is earlier. As against
this, in many cases the appeals are decided after fifteen or
twenty days. Needless to say, such delay will cause unnecessary
stress on the young talents, who even otherwise will be anxious
and worried about the result due to the unrealistic expectations
of their parents and teachers. This Court is also of the opinion
2024:KER:88170
that in cases of such undue delay, the fees remitted by the
students while filing the appeal should be refunded and that
amount should be recovered from the members of the appeal
committee. The said course of action should be adopted in this
case also.
8. While on the subject, it would also be apposite to
mention that, the innumerable writ petitions being filed in
relation to Kalolsavams create an impression that, Youth
Festivals, which are meant to promote talent and to build
confidence and self esteem of the young participants, is being
perceived as a battle field by some of the parents and teachers,
who are constantly engaged in a mad rush for securing the
highest place for their wards/ students. As rightly observed by
the learned single Judge in Devna Sumesh and Ors. Vs.
State of Kerala and Ors. [MANU/KE/3788/2022], it is more
important to participate than to win. Winning is not everything
and the parents should also equip their children to accept
failure.
2024:KER:88170
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed, with the above
observations.
sd/-
V.G.ARUN, JUDGE
sj
2024:KER:88170
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41120/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE MANUAL FOR THE SUB-
DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM, DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE
IRITTY SUB-DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM COMMITTEE,
DATED 29/10/2024
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL RECEIPT, DATED
29/10/2024
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEDULE FOR THE KANNUR
REVENUE DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM, DATED
21/11/2024,
