Harikrishnan.D. (Minor) vs The Assistant Educational … on 1 January, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 38309 of 2007(I)


1. HARIKRISHNAN.D. (MINOR),
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.JAJU BABU

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :01/01/2008

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

                 = =W.P.(C) = = = = = = = = = = =
                     = = =
                           No. 38309 OF 2007 I
                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                   Dated this the 1st January, 2008

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioner who was a participant in the folk dance at the Sub

District Youth Festival in which he was adjudged second. It is

stated that while he was performing on the stage, a nail struck on

his foot and that affected in his performance which resulted in his

inferior ranking. Aggrieved by the ranking given by the judges the

petitioner filed an appeal and that was also rejected. Thereupon

this writ petition has been filed praying for quashing the appellate

order and for directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to

participate in the District Youth Festival 2007-08 scheduled at

Kothamangalam from 1st January, 2008.

2. Even according to the petitioner, whatever be the reason

thereof, his performance was not upto even his own expectation. If

that be so, the ranking given by the judges cannot be impugned on

any valid grounds. I do not find any reason to interfere either with

WPC No. 38309/07 -2-

the decision of the judges or the conclusion of the appellate

committee.

3. However, the petitioner complains that the decision on his

appeal was not communicated to him and that Ext. P9 which alone

was communicated, does not contain any reason for rejection of the

appeal. It is true that Ext. P9 does not contain any reason as

pointed out by the petitioner, but then in all cases when appeals are

decided, separate orders are passed by the appellate committee.

Since the appellate order with reasons has not been communicated

to the petitioner, I direct the 2nd respondent to communicate to the

petitioner the decision taken on the appeal filed by the petitioner.

With this direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
jan/-