LAWS(KER)-2023-11-184

PRAJILA M Vs. STATE OF KERALA

Decided On November 03, 2023
Prajila M Appellant
V/S
STATE OF KERALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a young professional handball player and says that she was unfortunately injured during a match in the 44th Junior Girls National Handball Championship. She says that she belongs to a disadvantaged Sec. of the Society, with her father being a taxi driver by profession and the entire family managing on his meagre income; and therefore, that she is incapacitated from undergoing necessary medical procedures, including reconstructive surgeries, as has been recommended through Ext.P20 - Medical Report.

(2.) The petitioner says that, with all the fiscal constraints the family is facing, her father managed to give her the best medical assistance possible and this is clear from Exts.P12 to P16 certificates, to the effect that she has undergone multiple reconstruction surgeries on her anterior cruciate ligament. She says that, however, it is now impossible for the father to continue to finance her treatment; and therefore, she has preferred Ext.P17 representation before the 6th respondent - Kerala Sports Council, seeking their assistance to complete her medical requirements, failing which, her future as a handball player would be imperilled. She, therefore, prays that competent Authority of the 6th respondent - Kerala Sports Council, be directed to consider Ext.P17 and take an apposite decision thereon without any avoidable delay.

(3.) Smt.Latha Anand - learned Standing Counsel for the 6th respondent - Kerala Sports Council, in response, submitted that, though her client has no objection in considering Ext.P17, she expressed reservation whether it would be of any help to the petitioner because, normally, the Council gives medical assistance only to the players who are enrolled in the Academy run by them. She submitted that it is not clear from the pleadings whether petitioner is one among them; but added that, this can be looked into while Ext.P17 is considered. She, therefore, prayed that no affirmative declarations be made by this Court in favour of the petitioner in this judgment.