ANANYA ARAVINDAN v. DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION

DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION O/O THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695014 KALOLSAVAM COMMITTEE CONVENER ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, O/O THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695014 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER O/O THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, VIDYANAGAR - ULIYATHADKA RD, KASARAGOD, PIN - 671123 CHAIRMAN APPEAL COMMITTEE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, O/O THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION. CIVIL STATION, VIDYANAGAR, KASARGOD, PIN - 671123 SRI. SUNIL K.KURIAKOSE, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

09.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 10 OF 2024 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner says that she and her team participated in an event in the ‘District School Kalolsavam’, but were not awarded the First Rank; thus denying them the opportunity of moving to the next level, namely the ‘State Kalolsavam’, which has now been completed.

#2. The petitioner asserts that the results of the ‘District Level Kalolsavam’ were egregiously improper and therefore, that she preferred an Appeal before the Statutory Appellate Committee, as is provided under the Manual relating to the ‘Revenue District Kalolsavam’; but that the said Committee has rejected it, through the impugned order, without citing tenable reasons, but on hyper technical grounds.

#3. The petitioner, therefore, prays that the impugned order be set aside and that she and her team be allowed to participate in the ‘Kerala State School Kalolsavam’.

#4. Hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner in this case, at the time when this matter was considered for admission and adverting to the allegations and assertions made and contentions impelled, this Court passed an interim order, allowing the petitioner and her team to participate in the ‘State Kalolsavam’, however, clarifying that it will only be provisional. It was also made clear in the said order that, if the WP(C) NO. 10 OF 2024 3 petitioner and her team are to obtain Rank Nos.1, 2 or 3, same shall be declared only after obtaining orders from this Court.

#5. The ‘State School Kalolsavam’ was completed on 08.01.2024 and this Court is now told that the petitioner and her team have not obtained any of the first three ranks; and that all results have been declared, with the Kannur District being adjudged the Cup Winner.

#6. Obviously, therefore, all which now remains is to consider whether the petitioner and her team are entitled to the benefit of any grace marks that they may obtain through their performance, pursuant to the interim order of this Court.

#7. Though, as I have already said above, the interim order clearly provided that the performance of the petitioner and her team would be provisional, I am of the view that since they have performed, any resultant benefit that can inure to them, ought not to be denied. This is because, the best that the petitioner and her team would obtain is only grace marks, depending upon whether they have obtained ‘A Grade’ or otherwise; and I do not think that it will be justified for this Court to deny that to the contestants, solely for the reason that their Appeal had been dismissed at the ‘Revenue District School Kalolsavam’ level. The interim order by this Court was issued after due thought and finding a prima facie case in favour of the petitioner and her team; but WP(C) NO. 10 OF 2024 4 since they have not been able to obtain the first of the three ranks, I am of the firm view that it would not be necessary for this Court to enter into the merits of any other rival contentions.

#8. Obviously, therefore, all which this Court has to now do is to confirm the interim order, so that the petitioner and her team would obtain all collateral benefits entitled, based on their performance in the ‘State Level Kalolsavam’. In the afore circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of, confirming the interim order granted by this Court earlier and directing the Authorities to grant all benefits that may be entitled to the petitioner and her team, if any, based on their performance, as per law. MC/16.1 Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE WP(C) NO. 10 OF 2024 5 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10/2024 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 4THRESPONDENT ON THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER DATED 09.12.2023. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITIONER'S APPEAL BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS EXHIBIT- P2.