The evaluation of performance in events is subject to expert judgment and cannot be challenged unless exceptional reasons exist.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS

MONDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 / 22ND POUSHA, 1947

WP(C) NO. 287 OF 2026

PETITIONER :

RAISHA GAIZ K AGED 17 YEARS

D/O AYISHA E.P, KALATHINGAL VAZHAYIL HOUSE,

AREEKODE P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,

REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND

AYISHA E.P, AGED 51, W/O. NOUSHAD KALATHINGAL,

KALATHINGAL VAZHAYIL HOUSE,

AREEKODE P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,

PIN - 673639

BY ADV SRI.P.C.MUHAMMED NOUSHIQ

RESPONDENTS :

1 STATE OF KERALA

REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT,

SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,

PIN - 695001

2 DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,

JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,

PIN - 695014

3 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

OFFICE OF DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,

MALAPPURAM, UP HILL,

MALAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676505

4 THE PROGRAMME CONVENER MALAPPURAM REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2025-2026 OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL CONVENER DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PIN - 676504

5 THE APPEAL COMMITTEE MALAPPURAM REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2025-2026 OFFICE OF DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL CONVENER, PIN - 676504

6 THE PROGRAMME COMMITTEE KERALA STATE SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2025-2026, OFFICE OF OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION JAGATHI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL CONVENER, PIN – 695 014 SMT. AMMINIKUTTY K., SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.01.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J. --------------------------------

W.P.(C) No.287 of 2026 ---------------------------------

Dated this the 12^th day of January, 2026

JUDGMENT

Petitioner's team was a participant in the event 'Desabhakthiganam' in the Malappuram District School Kalolsavam 2025-26. They secured 2^nd place with 'A' Grade. Aggrieved by the evaluation conducted, they preferred an appeal. By Ext. P1 order dated 06.12.2025, the appeal was rejected against which this writ petition has been preferred.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader.

3. The main contention urged on behalf of the petitioner is that their performance on the day of the event was par excellence and they ought to have been awarded first place with A grade. Petitioner contended that the Judges erroneously placed them in a wrong position due to a faulty evaluation, which is required to be set aside and they be placed in the first place. The learned counsel submitted that the Judges had discussed amongst themselves during evaluation and further that the trainer of the first prize winner had sat behind the Judges and conducted himself in a manner which could have influenced the Judges and on that basis, the appeal was preferred. The learned counsel also contended that there was an overwriting in Ext.P3 score sheet of one of the Judges and that he had added '8' marks to make it '89' for the first prize winner instead of the originally awarded '81' thereby affecting the very basis of evaluation.

4. The Appellate Authority considered their contentions and rejected the challenge. The appellate authority came to such a conclusion after verifying the score sheets, Stage Manager's report, videograph and also the evaluation sheet. The Appellate Authority also noted that the performance on the day of the event of the petitioner was not up to the mark as that of the first place holder. The Appellate Authority also found that the difference between the first prize winner and the petitioner is ten marks and on that basis found no merit in the appeal apart from there being no merit in the factual allegations as well.

5. Interference with the evaluation of a performance or the order of the Appellate Authority cannot be subjected to challenge in a writ petition, unless there are exceptional reasons. The contention that on the day of the event the