IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2009 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 36435 of 2009(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SRUTHI KRISHNAKUMAR, AGED 15 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER AND NEXT GUARDIAN K.KRISHNAKUMAR, RESIDING AT SRUTHI, KNRA, A/112, LANE 6, KRISHNA NAGAR, PEROOR KADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.A.AHZAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, NORTH UPA JILLA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. ABHINAD R.S., PUTHENVEEDU, ATHANI LANE, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER MR. P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = W.P.(C). No. 36435 OF 2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of December 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioner appeared for the sub district level competition held in connection with Kerala School Kalotsavam 2009-2010. The sub district level competition was held on 20.11.2009. The petitioner secured only the second place with 'A' Grade in the event Violin (Western). Aggrieved thereby, she filed an appeal before the appeal committee on 20.11.2009. It is stated that the said appeal was not disposed of within 24 hours and that the petitioner was also not heard. The petitioner proceeds to state that she was informed on 14.12.2009 that the appeal has been rejected. The petitioner contends that the persons who had adjudged the Violin competition on 20.11.2009 at the sub district level were Guitarists and Musicians and that they were not experts in Violin. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to permit her to participate in the District level competition commencing today. 2. Heard Sri. A.Ahzar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The sub district level competition was held on 20.11.2009. The petitioner admittedly did not secure the first W.P.(C). No. 36435 OF 2009 2 place. Only participants who secure the first place in various events have the right to participate in the district level competition. Though a copy of the memorandum of appeal filed before the appeal committee has not been produced, a copy thereof was made available to me by the learned counsel for the petitioner for perusal at the time of hearing. In that appeal memorandum, the petitioner had no case that the persons appointed to judge the competition were not experts in Violin. Such a plea is raised for the first time in this writ petition. Therefore, it has to be necessarily held that the ground raised in this writ petition is different from the ground raised in the memorandum of appeal. In any case, in my opinion, if the appeal filed by the petitioner was not disposed of in time, she ought to have moved this Court earlier seeking expeditious disposal of the appeal. That apart, if the petitioner who won the second place in the sub district level competition is allowed to participate in the District level competition, it will cause serious prejudice to the second place winners of the other three sub districts. Therefore merely for the reason that there was delay in disposing of the W.P.(C). No. 36435 OF 2009 3 appeal, this Court will not be justified in granting the reliefs prayed for in this writ petition. Further, the District level competition will commence today. There is hardly any time left within which, this Court can call for instructions in the matter and adjudicate upon the dispute raised in this writ petition. In such circumstances, I am constrained to hold that the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner cannot be granted. I accordingly hold that there is no merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. (P.N.RAVINDRAN) JUDGE kkms/