IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 W.P(C).No. 1672 of 2008(Y) -------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. ARCHANA RAJENDRAN, AGED 36 YEARS, W/O. T. RAJENDRAN, TEAM MANAGER FOR VRINDAVADHYAM TEAM OF KANIKAMATHA CONVENT EMG HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD LED BY ITS TEAM LEADER (1) MS. KEERTHANA GOVIND AND THE FOLLOWING OTHERS (2) AISWARYA. S (3) LAKSHMI SHARMA (4) NADHA M.A. (5) MANASI NAIR (6) ANUSHA RAJAGOPAL, (7) HARIPRIYA. R 2. REGHU, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. G.V. NAIR, TEAM MANAGER FOR VRINDAVADHYAM TEAM OF KANIKAMATHA HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHANDRANAGAR, PALAKKAD LED BY ITS TEAM LEADER (I) RACHITHA RAMADAS AND THE FOLLOWING OTHERS (2) NITHIN JOHN, (3) RAMAMORTHY N.V. (4) AJAY. H (5) SANJEETH EDWIN (6) SREENATH MENON, (7) LAKSHMI V. G BY ADV. SRI.U.BALAGANGADHARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE CONVENER, STATE HIGHER SECONDARY YOUTH FESTIVAL 07-08 COMMITTEE, M.E.S. KUTTIPURAM, TRIKAKNAPURAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE JOINT DIRECTOR (ACADEMICS) - CUM- GENERAL CONVENER, OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. GENERAL CONVENER-CUM-PRINCIPAL, PALAKKAD DISTRICT HIGHER SECONDARY YOUTH FESTIVAL 2007-08, GOVT. VICTORIA GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, CHITTUR, PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 1672 OF 2008 - Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 14th January, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioners participated in the District Level Youth Festival in 'Vrindhavadhyam' , a group instrumental performance. It is stated that they got 2nd prize with A grade. Appeal filed was also rejected. The only contention that is urged before me is regarding the incompetency of the judges who assessed the performance of the petitioners. What is contended is that the judges were Karnatic Musicians and not familiar with Vrindhavadhyam, which they assessed. 2. A reading of the writ petition itself shows that the petitioners have not disclosed the names of the judges, nor have they given details of the judges or their qualifications. In these circumstances, the petitioners who are unaware of the identity of the judges or their qualification cannot successfully impugn the competency of the judges on imaginary grounds. I am not impressed by the contention raised by the petitioners. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE jan/-