IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2011 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1933 WA.No. 1940 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.9262/2010 Dated 09/06/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): RESPONDENTS IN THE WRIT PETITION ---------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, MEENANGADI GHSS, WAYANAD-673 691. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA RESPONDENT(S): WRIT PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. E.K.SUBRAMANIAN, EDATHADAN HOUSE, AMBALAVAYAL P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 593. 2. V.CHANDRANGATHAN, VATTELY HOUSE, KUPPADY P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 592. 3. V.DAMODARAN, PAZHERIYIL HOUSE, VADUVANCHAL P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 596. 4. JOSEPH JOHN V., VAZHAKKATTE HOUSE, KOLERI P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 596. 5. BINDU PRABHADAS, THANDAYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, AMBALAVAYAL P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 593. 6. JAYAPRAKASH, RADHAPURI HOUSE, MEENANGADI P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 591. 7. VIJAYAN P.G., CHENGATH HOUSE, MYLAMPADI P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 591. 8. A.R.SIVADAS, ERALANKOTTIL HOUSE, PUTHENKUNNU P.O., WAYANAD, PIN-673 595. 9. MARY, KALACHIRA QUARTERS, THOTTAPPANKULAM, BEENACHI, WAYANAD, PIN-673 592. 10. SAROJINI P.K., MALANKARA HOUSE, NENMANI P.O., KOLIYADI, SULTHAN BATHERI, WAYANAD, PIN-673 593. ADDL. 11.S.RADHIKA, W/O.LATE.A.R.SIVADA, ERALANKOTTIL HOUSE, PUTHENKUNNU.P.O., WAYANAD. ADDL.R11 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 1.3.2011 IN I.A.8/11. ADV. SMT.PRIYA ELIZABETH BABU FOR R2 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 1940 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar, C.J. This is an appeal by the State aggrieved by judgment in W.P.(C) No.9262 of 2010 dated 09.06.2010, by which a learned Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition. 2. The facts leading to the litigation is as follows: The State and the Principal of Meenangadi GHSS, Wayanad are the appellants herein. The respondents herein were the writ petitioners, who are respective parents of the minor children numbering 10, who participated in a team event known as “Thiruvathira” in the State level competition and for the sake of convenience in this judgment they are referred to as the petitioners though technically they are the children of the petitioners. 3. There is a scheme propounded by the State for awarding grace marks in the examinations conducted by WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:2:- the State in favour of the children who pursued extra-curricular activities such as dance, drama, painting etc. It appears that such a benefit is conferred on those participants either in an individual item or in a team item at the State level competition. The scheme also lays down a procedure by which students are selected for participation in the State level competition. 4. It appears that students are divided into four categories. First category is Class I to IV, second category is Class V to VII, third category is Class VIII to X and fourth category is Class XI to XII. The students falling into each one of these categories are entitled to compete only with the students of the same category. The selection process involves various levels of filtering of the talent; the full details of which may not be necessary for the present purpose; but suffice to state that after initial filtering students with reference to each of the art forms are selected for participation in District level competition and those who are adjudged best at the District level are only eligible to WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:3:- participate in the State level competition. 5. However, if any student or a team participating in the District level competition is aggrieved by the decision (of the judges) is entitled to prefer an appeal created under the abovementioned scheme. In such an appeal if the appellate forum comes to the conclusion that the appellant was unjustly denied the selection, such appellant is also permitted to participate in the State level competition. It is already mentioned above that those who participated in the State level are entitled for the grace marks in the examination on the academic side. However, under the scheme, Clause 12.04(11) it is provided as follows: “11. A participant who competes in the state level competition through the District level appeal, shall be considered for the award of grace marks only upon securing better score than the original winner of the District level competition.” 6. In the instant case, the respondent team was initially found unsuccessful in the District level competition, Wayanad and another team from the same District was found WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:4:- successful and became eligible to participate in the state level competition. However, the respondent team challenged the decision of the District level selection committee in an appeal successfully. As a result, the team of the writ petitioners' also participated in the State level competition. However, invoking the above extracted clause, members of the team were denied to the benefit of the grace marks and hence the writ petition. 7. A learned Judge of this Court allowed the writ petition and recorded the following reasons at paragraph 4 as follows: “4. When an appeal is allowed, it is on the basis that the original decision is wrong. Therefore, the petitioners participated in the state level competition because the appellate authority found that the decision of the lower authority is wrong and the petitioners were entitled to be selected for the state level competition. That being so, once the appeal is allowed and the appellant is allowed to participate in the State level competition, the appellant also becomes a regularly selected candidate. Thereafter that candidate cannot be discriminated on the ground that he/she participated on the basis of the decision in appeal. The fact that they did not perform better than the WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:5:- candidates who were regularly selected by the lower authority is no ground to deny the petitioners the benefit of the result of the state level competition. A clause in he Manual permitting such discrimination cannot be accepted as valid since the same is against the basic law. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to succeed in this writ petition.” 8. We see no reason to take a different view than the one taken by the judgment under appeal. Apart from the reason given by the learned Judge, we are of the opinion that the logic or rationale behind giving grace marks in the academic examination in favour of the children participating in the State level competition is that children would spend considerable amount of energy and time for training for the purpose of securing eligibility to participate in the state level competition which amount of time and energy could have been otherwise allotted to their studies. 9. Looked at from the purpose sought to be achieved by the scheme of awarding grace marks, the children who participated in the State level either by way of success in the original adjudication process or by appellate WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:6:- adjudication process, stand on the same footing. Mere fact that they did not perform better than the other team which initially succeeded in the District level in our view, is irrelevant for the purpose of considering the benefit of grace marks and the classification has no nexus to the purpose sought to be achieved. For the above reasons we see no reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal. The Writ Appeal is dismissed. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. Antony Dominic, Judge. ttb WA No. 1940 of 2010 -:7:-