IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 426 of 2010(C) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- AMRUTHA SURESH. V.P., NAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PERINGATHUR P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.K.V.SOHAN SMT.SREEJA SOHAN.K. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE GENERAL CONVENOR, KERALA SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM, KOZHIKODE. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 426 of 2010-C - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner participated at Kannur District Level Kalotsavam conducted on 2.1.2010 in four items, viz. Kuchipudi, Mohiniyattam, Kerala Nadanam and Group Dance. The main item of the petitioner was Kerala Nadanam in which she expected first place with A grade. But she got only lesser marks than she expected. It is the case of the petitioner that only one of the judges awarded lesser marks to her, as she was biased towards a boy participant who got first place in the said competition. 2. Aggrieved by the award of lesser marks, the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent. It is submitted that the said appeal was dismissed mechanically without showing any reasons. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition is filed. 3. Learned Govt. Pleader on instructions, submitted that there is a difference of 18 marks between the petitioner and the participant who got first place. It is also submitted that the appeal committee considered all the contentions raised by the petitioner and found that there is no merit in the same. The allegations of bias raised against one of the judges also was wpc 426/2010 2 found not correct. This Court will not be justified in interfering in the decision of the appeal committee in such matters. A reading of the writ petition also shows that the allegations are only general in nature which do not call for interference by this Court. The writ petition is therefore dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/