[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sandra Krishna L vs State Of Kerala on 8 January, 2026
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2026:KER:906
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 18TH POUSHA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 362 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
SANDRA KRISHNA L
AGED 17 YEARS
(MINOR),D/O MR. SHAIJU R,
12TH STANDARD STUDENT,
GOVT H.S.S KULATHOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER: MRS. LEKSHMI G,
AGED 40 YEARS, W/O MR. SHAIJU R,R
EMYA BHAVAN, SHASTAVATTOM, AZHOOR P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695305
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.R.SASITH
SMT.R.K.CHIRUTHA
SMT.ANJANA SURESH.E
SMT.REETHU JACOB
SMT.HASNA JABIL
SMT.ANJITHA S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695001
2 THE GENERAL CONVENER
KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2025-2026,
(THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
JAGATHY P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695014
3 THE CHAIRMAN APPEAL COMMITTEE
KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2025-2026, THE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695014
2026:KER:906
W.P(C) No.362 of 2026
-:2:-
4 THE GENERAL CONVENER
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT KALOLSAVAM 2025-
2026(THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, STATUE
JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695001
BY ADV. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE,
GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 08.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:906
W.P(C) No.362 of 2026
-:3:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
----------------------------------------
W.P(C) No.362 of 2026
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of January, 2026
JUDGMENT
Petitioner was a participant in the Thiruvananthapuram
Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2025-2026 for the event
'Kuchipudi' (Girls) held on 04.12.2025. She secured the third place and
lost the first prize by seven marks. Aggrieved by the failure to secure
the first prize, she filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority,
pointing out that a nail was piercing her feet during the performance
and also that the song being played during her performance came to an
abrupt stop, which affected her performance. However, by the
impugned order Exhibit-P2 dated 12.12.2025, the Appellate Authority
dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved by the said order, this writ petition has
been filed.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as the learned Government Pleader.
3. Petitioner's performance in the State School Youth Festival
is determined by her securing the first prize as well as 'A' Grade in the
event under consideration. Though the petitioner alleges that she
secured third prize and lost first place by seven marks, there is no
reference to the grade which she had obtained. Notwithstanding the
above, it is noticed that the Appellate Authority had considered every
2026:KER:906
grievance of the petitioner and came to the conclusion that the appeal
lacks merit. The contention regarding the piercing of the nail during the
performance and also the music having come to an abrupt stop was not
even reported by the stage manager. Further, the Appellate Authority
had even viewed the videograph of petitioner's performance. It is
thereafter that the Appellate Authority came to the conclusion that the
appeal lacks merit.
4. Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the scope of
judicial review is limited to identifying whether there is any error in the
procedure adopted by the authority. The decision as such cannot be the
subject matter of a challenge even if this Court may have a different
view.
5. Further, the impugned order is dated 12.12.2025, while the
writ petition was filed only on 05.01.2026, and the State Youth Festival
is scheduled to take place on 14.01.2026. Having regard to the above
circumstances, since the challenge has been raised practically on the
eve of the youth festival, I am of the opinion that the discretionary
remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be
exercised for that reason as well.
6. Apart from the above, in the absence of any exceptional
circumstances pointed out, this Court ought not to interfere in matters
relating to decisions by the judges in youth festival. Reference in this
regard can be made to Sweety vs. State of Kerala [1994 KHC 216]
2026:KER:906
and Devna Sumesh vs. State of Kerala [2023 (1) KHC (SN) 19] as
well as the decisions in Manas Manohar v. Registrar, Kerala Lok
Ayukta and Others [2022 (5) KHC 479] [2022 (5) KHC 479] and
Additional Director of Public Instructions and others v. Anagha
and others [2022 (5) KHC 473].
7. If any orders are passed by this Court permitting the
petitioner to participate in the youth festival, it will create complete
disarray the entire schedule of events. In the absence of any
exceptional circumstances having been pointed out by the petitioner
warranting an interference by this Court, I am of the view that this is
not a fit case where this Court should exercise its discretionary
jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
jka/08.01.26.
2026:KER:906
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 362 OF 2026
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 4.12.2025
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISMISSED ORDER BY
THE 3RD RESPONDENT ORDER NUMBER C
(4)/5045/2025, DATED 12.12.2025
