IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1725 of 2011(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. LAKSHMI PRAKASH, AGED 14 YEARS, D/O.V.V.PRAKASH, (STUDENT, ST.THOMAS HIGH SCHOOL, KALLARA), RESIDING AT VAREEPPALLI MYALIL HOUSE, PERUMTHURUTH P.O., KALLARA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, MINOR REP.BY HER FATHER V.V.PRAKASH, RESIDING AT DO. 2. THOMAS THADATHIL, PRESIDENT, PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION ST.THOMAS HIGH SCHOOL, KALLARA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJAN MANNALI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAWAM, CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. THE D.P.I., OFFICE OF D.P.I., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE D.E.O., OFFICER OF D.E.O., KOTTAYAM. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.DILEEP MOHAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 1725 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 19th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T In the Kottayam District Level Youth Festival, 1st petitioner's team participated in Oppana and won 3rd prize with A Grade. Complaining that, while performing, the mike system failed, which affected their performance. Appeal was filed, which was rejected by Ext.P1 order. It is this order, which is under challenge. 2. Learned Government Pleader points out that, while the first prize winner secured 244 marks, 1st petitioner and the other team, which were given 3rd prize had secured only 224 marks each. As far as the complaint of the petitioners regarding the failure of the mike system is concerned, learned Government Pleader submits that the appellate committee verified with the Stage Manager the correctness of this allegation and the Stage Manager had denied this claim. 3. First of all, if as stated by the petitioners, there was any failure of the mike system, that would have found a place in the report of the Stage Manager. Further, apart from the allegation in the writ petition, nothing has been placed on record WPC No. 1725/11 :2 : to substantiate this contention, which is disputed by the learned Government Pleader. Added to all this is the fact that the first prize winning team, who will be affected if any order is passed in favour of the 1st petitioner's team, has not been impleaded in this writ petition. For all these reasons, I am not persuaded to interfere with Ext.P1. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp