Sreelakshmi M. v. University of Calicut and others

**IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 23RD CHAITHRA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 13687 of 2018** ## **PETITIONER(S)** **--------------** **SREELAKSHMI.M, D/O. M.PRASANTH,AGED 18 YEARS, MANGATTU HOUSE, KOVILAKAMKUNDU,MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV.SRI.R.RANJITH (MANJERI)** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** - **-------------** **1. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY VICE CHANCELLOR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY, P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-PIN-673 635.** **2. THE CHAIRMAN, CALICUT UNIVERSITY UNION, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-PIN-673 635.** **3. THE GENERAL SECRETARY,** - **CALICUT UNIVERSITY UNION, CALICUT UNIVERSITY PO, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-PIN-673 635.** **4. THE CONVENOR, PROGRAMME COMMITTEE, D ZONE ARTS FEST-2018,CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O, THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-PIN-673 635.** **BY SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **TS** **WP(C).No. 13687 of 2018** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** **-----------------------** **EXHIBIT P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED, 01.5.2016.** **EXHIBIT P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DATED 12.5.2017.** **EXHIBIT P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER IN THE D -ZONE ART FEST 2018.** **EXHIBIT P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT, REJECTING THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER.** **RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS - NIL** **-----------------------------** ## **/TRUE COPY/** **PS TO JUDGE** **TS** **17.04.2018** ## **ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J.** **-----------------------------------------------** W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 **-----------------------------------------------** Dated this the 13[th] day of April, 2018 ## **J U D G M E N T** The petitioner, who is a student of Vimala College, Thrissur, who had participated in the item 'classical dance' in Calicut University D Zone Arts Fest, 2018, conducted in Panampalli Memorial College, Chalakkudy, and won the 2[nd] place in the event, as borne out from Ext.P3, is before this Court in this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P4 order dated nil of the 4[th] respondent appeal committee and seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to compete in classical dance event in the Inter-Zone competition-2018 of Calicut University. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Standing Counsel for the University representing respondents 1 to 4. 3. The sole issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether Ext.P4 order passed by 4[th] respondent ## W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-2-: warrants interference of this Court in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. The Arts Fest conducted by the 1[st] respondent University is governed by the provisions under the Calicut University Arts Fest Manual. Para.4 of the said Manual deals with competition at zonal level. As per Para.4.1, the Colleges affiliated with the 1[st] respondent University are divided into six zones, namely, A-Palakkad, B-Kozhikode, C-Malappuram, D- Thrissur, E-Lakshadweep and F-Wayanad. Going by Para.4.3, only those persons who secured 1[st] and 2[nd] place in the zonal competitions alone will be permitted to participate in the interzone competitions. As per Para.4.3, if more than one person have secured 1[st] place, the persons who secured 1[st] place alone, and in case one person secured 1[st] place and more than one person secured second place, the person secured 1[st] place and a person selected from those in the second place on the basis of lot shall be permitted to participate in the inter-zone competition. 5. As per Para.4.8, there will be an appeal committee for the zonal competitions consisting of the Principal of a College, W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-3-: Chairman of Programme Committee, Chairman/Secretary of University Union, General Convener and two Syndicate members nominated by the Vice Chancellor, one among whom, shall be a representative of the students. The quorum of the appeal committee shall be Principal/Programme Committee Chairman and two other members. 6. As per Para.4.9, any complaint or disputes arising in connection with the zonal competitions can be challenged before the appeal committee and the decision of the appeal committee shall be final. An appeal relating to declaration of results has to be submitted in writing to the Convener of the appeal committee within one hour of the declaration of the result. The fee for appeal is Rs.50/-. The appeal committee shall meet on all the days in which the festival is going on and shall dispose of the complaints received till that day. The appeal committee shall not entertain any complaint regarding the marks awarded by the Judges. Any complaint received regarding the conduct of the competitions shall be submitted within one hour from the completion of that competition, before the Convener of the appeal committee, for which receipt shall be given. Any W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-4-: complaint submitted regarding the conduct of festival, after declaration of result, shall not be entertained. 7. In the instant case, though the petitioner participated in the Calicut University D Zone Art Fest, 2018, and got 2[nd] place in the item 'classical dance', there are two persons who bagged first place in the event and hence the petitioner was not permitted to participate in the Inter-Zone Event. The procedure adopted by the respondents in this regard is strictly in terms of Para 4.3 of the Arts Fest Manual and as such, the petitioner cannot have any grievance at all. 8. The petitioner filed an appeal before the appeal committee, which ended in dismissal by Ext.P4 order dated nil. As per Para.4.9 of the Arts Fest Manual, an appeal to the appeal committee has to be submitted in writing. The petitioner has not chosen to produce a copy of the memorandum of appeal before this Court. The selection of two candidates, who have secured 1[st] place in Calicut University D Zone Art Fest, 2018, was done strictly in terms of Para.4.3 of the Manual. If that be so, the petitioner cannot have any legal or tenable contentions in order to maintain an appeal before the appeal committee in terms of W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-5-: Para.4.9 of the Manual. In that view of the matter, the appeal committee cannot be found fault with in dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner, vide Ext.P4 order. 9. In **Rhomy Chandra Mohan v. Gen. Convenor, Balakalotsavam and Yuvajanotsavam (1992 (1) KLJ 515)** this Court, while dealing with the grievance of a 'talented girl' in Bharathanatyam who had participated in the Trichur District Yuvajanotsavam held in the year 1992 observed as follows : "This system of assessment has therefore been adopted for the purpose of assessing the relative merit and the authorities have to depend upon the judgment of the judges appointed for the purpose. May be a different set of judges may take a different view of the matter But that does not mean that the assessment of merit by one set of judges is lacking in validity or otherwise irregular. Assessment of merit is ultimately a matter of objective assessment by a set of impartial judges guided by relevant principles. It is not possible for this court to sit in appeal over such awards in a proceeding under Art.226 of the Constitution. It is not within the province of this court to reassess the merits or demerits of candidates participating in a competition made by competent judges appointed for the purpose. This court can interfere only when there is a plain illegality or some malafides or some perversity or some other grossly vitiating circumstance in the assessment of merit.” 10. The law laid down in Rhomy Chandra Mohan's case (supra) has been followed by this Court in **Sweety v. State of** W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-6-: ## **Kerala (1994 (1) KLJ 47)** . Paras.4 and 5 of the said judgment read thus: “4. I would prefer to deal with this question also from a different angle. Every college or school authorities have discretion to adopt any rule or procedure to regulate the curricular or extra - curricular activities of students in their institutions. The educational authorities have also power to frame rules or by-laws for their own guidance in cases where State level or District level functions or festivals are organised to promote extra - curricular activities among students. Under whatever name they are called, they are purely rules, intended to serve internal discipline among the students. The persons or authorities functioning under such rules shall have absolute freedom to control and check the affairs of the students participating in such extra - curricular activities. Of course this freedom is subject to inherent and in - built restrictions. In maintaining internal discipline among students who participate in such functions or festivals, the persons or authorities in charge may adopt different modes for the conduct of the affairs In an orderly manner. According to me such persons or authorities shall not be called upon to explain their conduct in the discharge of their functions In exercise of powers available to this court under Art.226 of the Constitution. Of course the position is different if there is violation of fundamental rights of the students attending such festivals or functions by the action of such persons or authorities. In such extreme cases this court will be justified if interference is made. I fail to see any of such questions 1ft the present writ petitions. 5. While dealing with these cases it came to my notice that there are functionaries like 'Judges', 'Appeal Committee', etc. functioning under the rules framed for the conduct of W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-7-: competitions. Those bodies cannot be equated with ordinary judicial or quasi judicial bodies. As pointed out earlier, they are purely internal bodies of the educational institutions intended to subserve discipline among students in situations where disputes are likely to occur. The exercise of their functions is completely confined to the field of Youth Festival where the discipline is absolutely necessary for the proper conduct of different competitions among J the students. The decisions will have to be taken in certain cases on the spot and I fail to see how such decisions can be challenged in these proceedings. The assessment of performance of the participants are made by the 'judges'. Their wisdom and reason are final in such internal matters of educational institutions. However as an abundant caution the appeals are provided before the 'appeal committee" against the decision of the 'Judges'. The decision of the 'appeal' committee' shall be accepted as conclusive and final by the students and all others. That is purely a matter of observance of internal discipline. This court, according to me, will not be justified in interfering with such assessment of performance made by the appeal committee in their discretionary powers.” 11. By judgment dated 5.3.2018 in W.P.(C)No.7271 of 2018, this Court repelled the challenge made against the order passed by the appeal committee whereby selection of a team to Calicut University inter-zone Arts Fest in the item Kuchipudy dance was made by drew of lot among the two of the second position winners. The said judgment was affirmed by the Division Bench, by the judgment dated 15.3.2018 in W.A.No.636 W.P.(C)No.13687 of 2018 :-8-: of 2018, wherein the Division Bench held that only two contestants could participate in the Inter-zone Arts Fest and when the appellant therein and another who had participated in the item Kuchipudy dance in B-Zone Arts Fest were awarded with A-Grade with 2[nd] position, the authorities had to choose one among the two who had secured the 2[nd] position. In such circumstances, the authorities selected one candidate by drawing lots and in that process, the appellant therein lost her opportunity. Therefore, the procedure adopted by the authorities in this regard was rightly upheld by the learned Single Judge. 12. Viewed in the light of the provisions under the Arts Festival Manual and also the law laid down in the decisions referred to supra, no interference is warranted on Ext.P4 order of the 4[th] respondent. In such circumstances, this writ petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- **JUDGE** **ANIL K.NARENDRAN** ami/15.4.18 //True copy// P.A.to Judge