IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 11TH DECEMBER 2008 / 20TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 36603 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- ALBIN WILFRED, AGED 15 (MINOR) REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER E.WILFRED, S/O.EBENEZER, AGED 50,BETHEL, MOOLAKONAM, KOVALASSERI P.O. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. GENERAL CONVERNER/DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM, KILIMANOOR GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, KERALA SCHOOL, KALOLSAVAM 2008-09 2. APPEAL COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN/DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NEYYATTINKARA, KATTAKADA EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT KERALA SCHOOL, KALOLSAVAM 2008-09. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.R.SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.36603 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of December, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner, who is studying in the 10th standard, participated for Hindi Recitation in Kerala School Kalolsavam for two consecutive academic years and secured first place. He participated for the same item this year also in the Kattakada Education Sub District Level Kalolsavam. The performance was adjudged by three Judges. According to the petitioner, two of them were continuously talking through mobile phones, when his performance was going on. {There was power failure which had interrupted the free flow of recitation}. He, got only second place and A Grade). He filed an appeal. The appeal was also rejected under Ext.P4. The same has been challenged in this writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.R.T.Pradeep submits that the appellate order does not reveal application of mind by the appellate committee. I am unable to accept this contention. The contentions have been referred to and the appellate committee took note of W.P.(C).NO.36603/08 :: 2 :: the fact that the Judges have uniformly awarded higher marks to the winning team. The appraisal by the appellate committee as regards the regularity of the procedure followed by the Judges cannot be on the same footing, as a quasi judicial authority. In matters like this, what is expected of an appellate body is a consideration as to whether there was any grossly inadequate or improper appraisal of the assessment made by the Judges. No manipulation has been detected or even alleged. 3. Jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in matters of this kind where what is involved essentially turns on a subjective satisfaction of the Judges, who are expected to have expertise in the field is extremely limited. The writ petition is bereft of merit and the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge