Educational events must consider student mental health, but pre-existing arrangements and notice take precedence in scheduling.

JUDGMENT Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.

Heard on the question of admission.

The present intra-court appeal under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958 assails the judgment dated 28.11.2025 passed in WP(C) No.44832/2025 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein.

2. The appellant is a Class XII student and a Chairperson of SKV Higher Secondary School, Nanniyode, who had filed the Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to defer the Thiruvananthapuram District School Kalolsavam scheduled with effect from 01.12.2025 to 05.12.2025 to a date after the second terminal examinations which are scheduled with effect from 15.12.2025.

3. The grievance of the appellant is that conduct of the District School Kalolsavam just prior to the examination will cause immense mental pressure on the participants and in such circumstances, it will be appropriate for the respondents to postpone the District School Kalolsavam after the second terminal examinations. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant is also one of the participants along with more than 212 students who are participating from the school and if the same is not postponed, then the second terminal examination will be adversely affected. The mental health of the students ought to be given primacy by the educational authorities and the short notice of conducting District Kalolsavam has added to the mental pressure of the students.

4. Per contra, the learned Government Pleader opposed the prayer and submitted that earlier the District School Kalolsavam was scheduled with effect from 25.11.2025 to 29.11.2025. However, due to unavoidable reasons, the same has been postponed and to be conducted with effect from 01.12.2025. All the students were well aware of the Kalolsavam to be conducted with effect from 25.11.2025, therefore, there is no question of adding of mental pressure to the students. Thereafter, also there are more than 10 days available for the students to appear for the terminal examination which is to commence with effect from 15.12.2025.

5. Taking into consideration the fact that the arrangements have already been made to conduct the Kalolsavam as scheduled and the dates were fixed taking various factors into consideration, such as availability of venue, judges, Teachers, Officers, regional issues etc, therefore, the learned Single Judge was right in dismissing the Writ Petition.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

7. On perusal of the pleadings of the Writ Petition, as well as the Writ Appeal, it is seen that the appellant has nowhere stated that he is one of the participants in the Kalolsavam, whereas he has pleaded the cause of 212 school students, meaning thereby, the Writ Petition ought to have been filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation. Secondly, the school in which he is studying is not added as one of the respondents. Taking into consideration the fact that arrangements have already been made to conduct the Kalolsavam and lakhs of rupees have been spent by the Government at this stage, it would not be appropriate for this Court to postpone the Kalolsavam to another date. Even the balance of convenience does not lie with the appellant. The learned Single Judge was right in rejecting the Writ Petition. We do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the same is dismissed at the admission stage itself.