Sometime in mid-December, Preethika Balakrishnan, a Class XI student from BAR Higher Secondary School in Kasaragod's Bovikkanam, sent a complaint to the Deputy Director of Education (DDE). Her request was simple: do not appoint Sasi Pattannur as a judge for the mono act and drama competitions at the district-level School Kalolsavam.

Preethika pointed out a clear conflict of interest. Pattannur’s name as a judge had been circulating in WhatsApp groups weeks in advance, she said, and he was a close associate of P Sasi Kumar of Nileshwar, a well-known theatre trainer whose students have consistently dominated mono-act competitions. To back her claim, she submitted photographs showing the two together.

The complaint changed nothing. Pattannur went on to judge the mono act competition. Students trained by Sasi Kumar won both the boys’ and girls’ mono act titles in the higher secondary category, said Preethika.

After the results were announced, Preethika broke down. “There were eight teams. I was told I came last,” she said. Raised by a single mother with no steady income, she said she could not afford to file an appeal or approach the court. The appeal fee at the district level is ₹5,000. If the appeal is upheld, the student must deposit an additional ₹10,000 to compete at the state level, a sum that is returned only if she outperforms the district-level winner.

Preethika Balakrishnan had given up because of her circumstances. Ahammed Shibiyaan K P (15), a Class 10 student of CHM High School in Malappuram's Pookolathur, did not. A participant in the Arabanamuttu group dance, Shibiyaan pursued the matter and discovered that one of the three judges had inflated the totals of two teams -- by 11 and 10 marks respectively -- pushing them from third and fourth positions to first and second. The beneficiaries of these “erroneous calculations” were PKM Higher Secondary School, Edarikkode (declared first) and PPM Higher Secondary School, Kottukara (declared second).

After the Education Department's Appeals system also failed him, Shibiyaan moved the High Court. When the case came up before the HC on January 6, Justice V G Arun agreed with Shibiyaan, observing that, prima facie, “the manner in which the marks have been calculated, and corrections carried out indicate an attempt at manipulation,” and directed the State to explain why the totals were computed incorrectly.

On January 9, the matter was heard again, and Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas permitted Shibiyaan and his team to participate in the State School Kalolsavam in Thrissur from January 14 to 18, said his counsel, Advocate Ameen Hassan K, who took up the case pro bono after seeing the boy break down.
Advocate Hassan said they would also seek punitive action against the judges who allegedly attempted to deny students their rightful victory with impunity.

The Malappuram Revenue District School Kalolsavam was held between November 18 and 22. Sixteen Arabanamuttu teams competed in the high school category. When the results were announced, Shibiyaan’s team was placed fourth.

The first prize went to PKM Higher Secondary School, Edarikkode. PPM Higher Secondary School, Kottukara, was placed second, and HMY Higher Secondary School, Manjeri, third. 
The results shocked not only Shibiyaan and his team but the crowd, too. “We got the loudest applause from the crowd,” Shibiyaan said. “We had been practising since the beginning of the academic year, and we felt we had done our best.” What surprised them more, he said, was the team that won. “The audience's response to them was cold.”

When Shibiyaan's team wanted to appeal, his father, Mansoor Faisal K P, decided to support him. "I saw their performance and wanted to know what really happened," said Faisal, who works in the luggage section at Kozhikode airport.

The team filed an appeal the very next day, paying the ₹5,000 fee. On December 6, Thiruvananthapuram DDE Ramlath K K, chairman of the Higher Appeal Committee, rejected their appeal, saying his team lagged 7.5 points behind the winning team. But the order was served to him only on December 16. 

That rejection became the turning point. Using the Right to Information Act, Shibiyaan obtained the individual score sheets of the three judges and the consolidated mark list. What he saw told a very different story.

The judges were Muhammed Kasi (Kanthapuram), Kunhimoidu (Pandikashala), and Basheer Pantheerpadam (Kunnamangalam). Each judge awards marks out of 100 across five parameters: stance & posture, pitch & rhythm, expression, stage movement, percussion handling, and overall presentation. 

Basheer Pantheerpadam’s score sheets showed no corrections or overwriting. The others did. Muhammed Kasi revised the marks of PPM HSS, Kottukara, upward in all five categories, raising the total from 83 to 90. Though such corrections are discouraged under festival guidelines, they were initialled, making them difficult to legally challenge. Notably, he did not alter the marks of any other school.

Kunhimoidu’s score sheets raised even more serious concerns.
For PPM HSS, Kottukara, the five category scores added up to just 82. Kunhimoidu totalled it as 93; the jump of 11 marks pushed the school from fourth place into the prize list.

For PKM HSS, Edarikkode, the scores added up to 83.5, but were written as 93.5, a 10-mark inflation that vaulted the team to first place from third position. The inflated total starkly stood as Kunhimoidu had awarded the school just 13.5 out of 20 for stance & posture, and 15 each for expression and overall presentation. 
In contrast, he gave CHM High School, Pookolathur, Shibiyaan’s team, full 20 marks in three categories.

For HMY HSS, Manjeri, Kunhimoidu again inflated the total by one point, writing 92 instead of the actual 91. But even without that extra point, when the scores were recalculated correctly, the picture flipped with the Manjeri school coming on top with 269 out of 300 points. Shibiyaan's CHM HS, Pookolathur, stood second with 267. The winner, PKM HSS, Edarikkode, had only 264.5, not 274.5; and PPM HSS, Kottukara, had 263, not 274.

But the Manjeri school did not appeal and was robbed of its rightful position at the state event. Second-placed Kottukara school's appeal was accepted on the grounds that it was only two points behind the 'winner'. 

In reality, Shibiyaan's school was only two points behind the real winner, Manjeri, and would have made it to the state event on appeal.

School youth festivals are officially held under the watch of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau. Judges are placed under surveillance, and even attempting to contact them is a punishable offence. General Education Minister V Sivankutty has said Vigilance presence at the festival will be strong. Yet the Malappuram episode shows how outcomes can still be shaped quietly, through a few strokes of a pen, a rewritten total, or a “harmless” correction on a score sheet.

Advocate Ameen Hassan said the battle was far from over. Under the rules, teams that qualify for the State School Kalolsavam through appeals or court orders are eligible for 30 grace marks (in Class 10) only if they secure an A grade and outperform the team originally selected from their district. “In Shibiyaan’s case, his team is the actual top performer from the district. The grace marks rule should therefore not apply to them,” he said, adding that this is one of the key prayers before the High Court. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas’s direction, Hassan said, came by way of an interim order. “We hope the final judgment reflects this position and that the judges responsible are also held accountable for their actions,” he added.