Kerala HC Suggests Constitution Of A Tribunal Or Ombudsman To Hear Grievances Related To 'School Kalolsavam'

“Such an arrangement is all the more necessary in view of the fact that the precious time of the High Court cannot be spend over grievances, which arise from the School Kalolsavam, when more important matters, which affect the life and liberty of the citizens are pending adjudication by the Court.”

The Court suggested that if it is a tribunal, a retired High Court Judge can be appointed as the Chairman. The Court further said that two more members can be appointed – one a retired IAS officer chosen by the Government and the third member having special knowledge or expertise in the field of art or literature shall be co-elected by the other 2 members. The Court said that the Government can appoint the Chairman after consulting with the High Court.

The Court thereafter asked the State Government's Secretary–General Education Department, Deputy Director of Education and District Education Officer of Kozhikode to reply to this suggestion.

The Court said this after noting that several writ petitions had come up before the court pertaining to Kalolsavam which pertains to factual aspects. It said that the High Court cannot ascertain and adjudicate on factual aspects when it is exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The Court added that this further points towards the necessity of having a specialized body for dealing with these issues. It opined that the inclusion of persons in the Judges panel should also receive the concurrence of the proposed body. 

The order was passed in a petition challenging the competence of one of the judges in a panel of the Kalolsavam. The judge was among the panel of 3 judges. While the other 2 judges marked one of the candidates poorly, she was given 10 marks by the 3^rd judge. The other 2 judges also submitted their affidavits before the Court raising doubts on the competence and conduct of 3^rd judge.

The Special Government Pleader submitted before the Court that the judge was included in the panel based on a declaration wherein her education qualification was stated as B.A. Mohaniyattam with a Diploma in Kuchipudi. The Special Government Pleader submitted that the said Judge was included in the panel acting upon the said declaration.

The high court thereafter said, "This Court is alarmed to hear the said submission. Only on the basis of the declaration given by a person, the authorities, who are conducting the mega festival of School Kalotsavam have permitted such a person to be included in the panel of Judges, without ascertaining the veracity of the claims made in the declaration. Learned Special Government Pleader has no case that even the certificates of the said Judge were ascertained by the persons, who are in charge of selecting the Judges. This Court is of the opinion that this is not a matter, which concerns or pertains to the petitioner individually, but one which goes to the root of the matter, pointing to something rotten in the city of Denmark, which in the present context, in the conduct of the Kalotsavam". 

It also took note of the affidavits filed by the other two judges and said, "Suffice to say that they have their own serious doubts with respect to the competence and conduct of the 3rd Judge". 

In the present plea, the court thereafter directed State of Kerala's Secretary–General Education Department, Deputy Director of Education and District Education Officer, Kozhikode to "swear to specific counter affidavits" before the Court dealing with the contentions raised in this Writ Petition, "especially as against the competence of the 3rd Judge by name Sreekutty Vinod, within a period of ten days" from the court's order. 

"For the time being, the petitioner is permitted to participate in the event Kuchipudi in the State Kalotsavam. By the said interim direction, this Court is not inclined to put a full stop to the issues involved in this Writ Petition," it said. 

The court thereafter listed the matter on January 15. 

Case Title: Neha Nair v State of Kerala and Others

Case No: WP(C) 46528 of 2024