High Court of KeralaWP(C)/397/2015dismissed

Annie Deleela C.J. v. The Deputy Director Of Education

2015-01-08Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/18TH POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 397 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

--------------------------

1. ANNIE DELEELA C.J., AGED 49 YEARS, W/O.C.V.HANI, PRINCIPAL, GOVT. HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, NORTH PARAVOOR.

2. VARUN T.S., AGED 18 YEARS,S/O.SADANANDAN, KAIPPILY HOUSE, KUNNAPPILLISSERY, PULIYANAM POST, PIN-683 572.

BY ADVS.SRI.N.M.MADHU SMT.C.S.RAJANI RESPONDENT(S):

----------------------------

1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD-682 030.

2. THE STATE PROGRAMME CONVENOR, KERALA STATE SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM, KOZHIKODE-673 001.

3. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THYCAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

R1 TO R3 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

sts

WP(C).NO.397/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

P1 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19/12/2014 P2 COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.Y.2/25337/2012/DPI ISSUED BY THE DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION ON 30/10/2012. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

======================== W.P.(C). No. 397 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2015

JUDGMENT

The 1st petitioner is the Principal of the Government Higher Secondary School, North Paravoor. Her team stood second with A grade in 'Parichamuttukali' held in Sub District School Youth Festival. On appeal filed, they were allowed to participate in the District level but could bag only the second place, despite the best performance. The appeal filed by the team leader (the second petitioner) was rejected and the video clipping was not viewed by the appeal committee. Hence the writ petition.

2. The learned Government Pleader submits on instructions that, the 1st prize winner got 257 marks and that of petitioners' team got only 254 marks. It is submitted that the Appeal committee has viewed the video clipping of the event and that the judges of the judging committee had evaluated the event in a uniform manner.

3. After going through the pleadings and proceedings and the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds that the petitioners have not established any tenable ground to call for interference. Accordingly, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

kp/-