High Court Kerala High Court

Roshna V.P vs Deputy Director Of Education on 8 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
Roshna V.P vs Deputy Director Of Education on 8 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 693 of 2010(J)


1. ROSHNA V.P.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRCTION,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.N.RAMESAN NAMBISAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :08/01/2010

 O R D E R
                       T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                     - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        W.P.(C) No.693 of 2010-J
                    - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
               Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010.

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner herein is a Plus Two student and had participated in the

Kannur District Kalotsavam in the item Thiruvathira. The petitioner’s group

was awarded A grade, but could not get selection to participate in the State

School Kalotsavam and aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed. It

is alleged that there was widespread favouritism bias and other extraneous

elements in the decision making process and it is also submitted that the

previous year’s result would favour their team. Even though an appeal was

filed, that could not yield any result and it is in these circumstances, this

writ petition is filed.

2. Learned Govt. Pleader submitted that there is a difference of 12

marks between the winning team and the petitioner’s team (243 and 231)

respectively) and the petitioner’s team was awarded 5th place.

3. The allegations raised by the petitioner are not sufficient to

interfere with the result of the competition. I do not find any ground to

interfere with the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petition is therefore dismissed. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

2

kav/