Abimanyu R vs Director Of General Education

C. Jayachandran, J

The petitioner participated in the event “Dafmuttu” in the Higher Secondary School Kalolsavam. The petitioner had obtained only the 3rd position, with A-Grade. The specific allegation made is that the judges of the event were close aides of the tutor of the team which bagged the first prize.

The learned counsel would point out that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of being heard in person, which according to the learned counsel is a mandatory provision. On such premise, the petitioner seeks the writ petition to be allowed, permitting the petitioner to contest in the State Kalolsavam.

The above submissions were seriously refuted by the learned Government Pleader. It was pointed out that there is no mandate to hear the petitioner in every case. Going by the circular issued by the Director General of Education, the petitioners in the appeals need to be heard, if the same is found necessary.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds little merit in the instant writ petition. The specific allegation raised as regards the bias of the judge is not even prima facie made out by any material before this Court. That apart, this Court notice that there is a difference of 31 marks between the petitioner and the 1st rank holder. Perusal of Ext.P1 would indicate that the appeal committee had perused and analysed the video and the score sheet, to find that the allegations levelled in the appeal has not been made out.

In such circumstances, there cannot be any interference, only for the reason that the petitioner was not heard, especially when the circular issued by the General Education Department does not mandate, but only stipulates such hearing, wherever it is required.

Accordingly, this writ petition fails and the same stands dismissed.