Gayathri Krishnan v. Director Public Instruction

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2015/23RD POUSHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 1037 of 2015 (D) -------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S) :

------------------------- GAYATHRI KRISHNAN, AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.KRISHNAN, KRISHNA NIVAS, MANUSHI, VADAVANNUR, PALAKKAD (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER & GUARDIAN, SANTHAKUMARI, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O. KRISHNAN, KRISHNA NIVAS, MANUSHI, VADAVANNUR, PALAKKAD.

BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

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

1. DIRECTOR PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD-678 001.

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-01-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

WP(C).No. 1037 of 2015 (D) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1:

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. K2/20000/2014 DATED 26-11-2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.1037 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of January, 2015

JUDGMENT

The petitioner was a participant in the events,District School Youth Festival. The petitioner's team was awarded only the 4th place. The petitioner's contention is that, when the petitioner's team started their performance, there occurred a problem with the audio system on the stage. The appeal filed by the team 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 petitioner's team got only the 4th position out of the 17 participants. There was no defect in the mike system. No complaints were received. 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

W.P.(C) No.1037 of 2015 the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds that the petitioner's team has not established any tenable ground to call for interference.

Accordingly, interference is declined and the writ petition is dismissed.

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE sp