Posted On by &filed under High Court, Kerala High Court.


Kerala High Court
Sanal V Shaju vs The Director Of Public … on 18 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 1683 of 2011(I)


1. SANAL V SHAJU, AGED 16 YEARS
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE GENERAL CONVENOR FOR KERALA SCHOOL

3. THE DEPUTY  DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION

4. THE APPEAL COMMITTEE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.A.CHACKO

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :18/01/2011

 O R D E R
                       ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                   W.P.(C) No. 1683 of 2011 I
             ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
           Dated this the 18th day of January, 2011

                            J U D G M E N T

In the Wayanad Revenue District School

Kalolsavam, petitioner participated in the item ‘Nadodi

Nrutham’ and secured 3rd place with ‘A Grade’. Appeal

complaining defect in the sound system filed by the petitioner

was rejected by Ext.P3 order. It is challenging Ext.P3 order,

this writ petition is filed.

2. Learned Government Pleader, who has obtained

instructions in the matter, submits that the stage manager’s

report was obtained and that the report was to the effect that

there was no defect in the sound system. It is also stated that

no other participant had raised any complaint similar to that of

the petitioner. It is also pointed out that the difference in

marks between the first prize winner and the petitioner was

12.

3. First of all, petitioner has not produced any material

W.P.(C) No.1683/2011
: 2 :

to substantiate the contention that the sound system was

defective. This coupled with the submissions made by the

learned Government Pleader makes it impossible for this

Court to accept the contention of the petitioner. Added to this,

there is wide disparity in the marks secured by the petitioner

and the 1st prize winner, who has not been impleaded in this

writ petition.

Writ petition fails and it is dismissed.

Sd/-

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks

// True Copy //

P.A. To Judge


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.179 seconds.