Back
2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 6269
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SHAJI P.CHALY, J
NANDITHA VINESH – Appellant
Versus
MAHATMA GANDHI (M.G) UNIVERSITY – Respondent
WP(C) 4251/2023
M.JAYAKRISHNAN, SHAJI MATHEW, N.M.VIJAYAN NAIR, G.SINEESH, K.M.
Judicial interference in performance evaluations is limited to cases with compelling evidence of wrongful conduct or evaluation.
Headnote:
Judicial Review - Folk Dance Competition - Article 226 - The court held that it cannot interfere in evaluation matters of artistic performance unless compelling circumstances are proven, thereby upholding the authority of judges and college officials in adjudicating competitions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a student, participated in a folk dance competition but did not secure the first prize, which was necessary to qualify for the inter collegiate festival. The petition challenges the judges' and Principal's evaluation.
Issues: Whether the court should interfere with the evaluation of a performance in a college competition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that unless compelling circumstances are shown, it will not interfere in the evaluations made by designated judges.
Final Decision: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 8th day of February, 2023 The petitioner is a student of the St.Thomas College, Ranni. Petitioner participated in the intra college competition for 'folk dance' in order to qualify for the M.G University inter collegiate youth festival. As per the guidelines and rules fixed by the Mahatma Gandhi University, only the first prize winner from each college can participate in the inter collegiate youth festival. Petitioner has not secured the first place. According to the petitioner, petitioner is placed last among four participants. It is thus challenging the legality and correctness of the evaluation made by the judges and the appellate authority, ie., the Principal of the College, this writ petition is filed.
2. The first question to be considered is to whether in such matters should a writ Court interfere, exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India . In my considered opinion, when designated judges evaluate performance of an artist, a perception is achieved on the basis of the performance made by the participants at that point of time. Merely because petitioner was a winner during the earlier years, that is not a ground at all to claim that petitioner is entitled to go for the inter collegiate competition for the ensuing year also. The question with reference to the interference in such matters was considered by this Court in various judgments, which are as follows;
“1.Rhony Chandra Mohan v. General Convenor Balakalotsavan and Yuvajanotsavam [1992 KHC 211- 1992(1) KLJ 515]
2. Devna Sumesh and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Ors. /b>.
[MANU/KE/3788/2022]
3. Sweety v. State of Kerala [1994(1) KLT SN.5 (C. No. 4).”
3. It was held that unless and until compelling circumstances are established, a writ Court shall not interfere in such matters. Therefore, after having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri.M.Jayakrishnan, Learned Standing Counsel for the Mahatma Gandhi University, Sri.Surin George Ipe. I am of the considered opinion that, petitioner has not made out any case for interference with the evaluation made by the judges, or the appellate order passed by the Principal of the college. Moreover, there is no allegation of malafides, nepotism, or any such illegalities, at least to enable this Court to look into the matter and adjudicate the issues.
Writ petition fails, accordingly it is dismissed.
