Ananya P vs Director Of General Education

C. Jayachandran, J

The petitioner was a contestant in “group dance” event, but she could secure only the 3rd  prize, with A-Grade.

The allegation raised is that the back curtain swayed in the wind during the event, which affected the performance of the whole team, including the petitioner. The stage was mismanaged, according to the petitioner. After the performance by the petitioner’s team, the back curtain was corrected by the stage manager and the other participants could reap the advantage of the same. These aspects were not considered by the appellate authority, is the grievance espoused. These submissions were seriously opposed by the learned Government Pleader.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court finds little merit in the instant writ petition.

Primarily, the specific allegation with respect to the curtain does not find a place in Ext.P1 appeal preferred by the petitioner. It only speaks of the instability of the stage and the insufficiency of the size of the stage. That apart, this Court notice that, Ext.P2 would indicate that the appeal committee has heard the petitioner in person, besides perusing and analyzing the video, the score sheet and the report of the stage manager, to arrive at a conclusion that the evaluation was not affected by any of the factors, as alleged in the appeal. Ext.P2 order also finds that there is a difference of 8 marks between the petitioner and the 1st rank holder. This Court cannot find any tangible reason to interfere with the factual findings of the appellate authority. Nor is such an exercise expected of this Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, this writ petition fails and the same stands dismissed.