IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 22ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4445 of 2009(D) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SREE LAKSHMI.S, D/O. A.R. SUBRAMANIAN, AGED 19 YEARS, (B.SC 2ND YEAR (STATISTICS) STUDENT, FAROOK COLLEGE, KOZHIKODE), “SREENAVAM”, BEHIND JAHANARA THEATRE, MANNARKKAD ROAD, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY MR.K.MUHAMMED SALAHUDHEEN, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. THE PRINCIPAL, SNG COLLEGE, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. THE PROGRAMME COMMITTEE CONVENER, CALICUT UNIVERSITY B ZONE ARTS FESTIVAL 2008-2009, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. THE GENERAL CONVENER, (GENERAL SECRETARY, CALICUT UNIVERSITY UNION) CALICUT UNIVERSITY B ZONE ARTS FESTIVAL 2008-2009, CHELANNUR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. THE GENERAL CONVENER, CALICUT UNIVERSITY, INTERZONE ARTS FESTIVAL COMMITTEE, GOVT. SANSKRIT COLLEGE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4445 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of February, 2009 J U D G M E N T In the Calicut University B Zone Arts Festival, the petitioner had participated in Kuchippudi and Folk Dance competitions. For Kuchippudi, she was given third prize and for Folk Dance, 2nd prize. Aggrieved by the prizes that were given, she filed Exts.P1 & P2 appeals. These appeals have been rejected by the appellate committee as per Exts.P3 & P4. It is challenging the appellate orders, and praying that she be given the 1st prize, the writ petition is filed. 2. First of all, it is to be noticed that both the first prize winners in the respective items have not been impleaded in the writ petition, and therefore, any order disturbing their position cannot be passed in this writ petition. Even otherwise, though personal allegations have been made against the judges, they also are not parties in the writ petition. That apart, I also noticed that even in Exts.P1 & P2 appeals filed, the grounds urged in the writ petition have not been taken. WP(C) No.4445/2009 -2- 3. Therefore, in these circumstances, I cannot find any material to hold that either the assessment of the performance by the Judges or the decision rendered by the appellate committee is erroneous warranting interference. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg