IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 37324 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- SASIDHARAN PILLAI.K., MUSIC TEACHER(SCHOOL TEAM MANAGER) SREE BHUVANESWARY HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MANNAR, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.K.S.SAIRA SRI.A.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ALAPPUZHA 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA. 4. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.37324 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008. JUDGMENT Petitioner is a Music Teacher in Sree Bhuvaneswary Higher Secondary school, Mannar and he is the Team Manager of the Team, which had participated in two items, 'Drama and Oppana' in the Sub District Level Youth Festival in the Chengannur Educational Sub District Kalotsavam. It is contended that the same team was adjudged with 'A' Grade the previous year, though originally for the item Drama, their team was adjudged only in the second place. This was later rectified. They were permitted to participate and they secured first place at the District Level and the State Level. 2. It so happened that the same drama was staged by the rival team and they were adjudged to be in the first place this year. It is pointed out that this is an indication of an arbitrary assessment. 3. With regard to the item 'Oppana', the allegation is that the song, to which the students had performed, was one, was not suitable for Oppana, but it W.P.(C).NO.37324/08 :: 2 :: was a Mappilappattu. These things, according to the petitioner, were brought to the notice of the appellate committee, it had, in a cryptic manner, dismissed the appeal. The same is under challenge in this writ petition. 4. I have gone through the orders passed by the appellate committee and I have referred to the contentions. The challenge made by the petitioner was against the assessment made by the Judging panel. This, the appellate committee found, on a perusal of the report and the other documents, does not seem to have substantiated. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed. The copy of the appeal stated to have been filed by the petitioner is not placed on record. Going by the orders, the appellate committee has considered the challenge in the appeal relating to the assessment. They have independently perused the records and have affirmed the conclusion. They have not found any grounds to interfere with the assessment. 5. In my view, the assessment made by the Judges panel or the appellate committee, have not been W.P.(C).NO.37324/08 :: 3 :: demonstrated to be grossly arbitrary so as to invite interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is quite possible that the performance of a team might differ, when the same team performs the same drama on a subsequent occasion or even on the same day. If that be so, the performance of the team for the previous year can be no indication of the relative performance of the teams during the current year. A comparison of the performance on a particular day should be left to the Judges, who are competent in their own field. I do not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge