IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 5TH JANUARY 2010 / 15TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 61 of 2010(G) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JABIR.P.MUHAMMEDUNNY AGED 19 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMEDUNNY PARATTU HOUSE, BLANGAD P.O., CHAVAKKAD VIA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680506. BY ADV. SRI.P.R.SHAJI SRI.K.DHANESH KUMAR SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. GENERAL CONVENOR, REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL YOUTH FESTIVAL OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THRISSUR EDUCATIONAL DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHODE, THRISSUR. 2. CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE OF MULLASSERY EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL YOUTH FESTIVAL, 2009-2010, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.61/2010-G ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 5th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein was a participant in Arabanamuttu (Boys) in the competition conducted in the Educational Sub District School Youth Festival, Mullassery on 16/12/2009. Ten participants including the petitioner were there in the team for the performance of Arabanamuttu (Boys) representing the M.A.S.M Higher Secondary School, Venmanad. The competition was held at St.Joseph's High School, Enamakkal during the period from 14/12/2009 to 17/12/2009 and the programme of the petitioner's team was scheduled to be held on 16/12/2009. 2. The complaint raised by the petitioner herein is that at the time of performance of the petitioner's team, the floor of the stage was not cleaned and there were broken pieces of bangles, pins and other items. Apart from the same, it is also pointed out that the Organisers did not install the mega phone/sure mikes properly. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner contends that the team could not perform in its fullest vigour. Exts.P3(1) to P3 (4) are relied upon to show that his team had won in the competitions held in earlier years. The petitioner had preferred an appeal against the Judging Committee. The W.P.(C). No.61/2010 -:2:- appeal, according to the petitioner was decided with inordinate delay. Ext.P6 is the copy of the order passed by the Appeal Committee in the appeal. 3. It is also the case of the petitioner that the Appeal Committee has not considered anything on the merits of the matter. A reading of Ext.P6 order, dated 23/12/2009, shows that the Appeal Committee found that there is no merit in the complaint. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that going by condition No.4 of 12.01--School Level Appeal Committee (Chapter 12 of the Kerala School Youth Festival Manual), appeal has to be decided within a period of five days and, herein as the outer limit was breached, the decision itself is vitiated. 4. I am not satisfied that merely because of one or two days' delay, the decision itself is vitiated. What is relevant for consideration is the question whether there is any merit in the contentions raised by the petitioner. The complaint raised by the petitioner is of a generalised nature. It is also seen from the averments in the writ petition that the petitioner's team could not perform properly although they contend that it happened due to various aspects pointed out in the writ petition. The allegation that the conditions of the stage were not proper, being a factual dispute, cannot be decided in this W.P.(C). No.61/2010 -:3:- writ petition. As the Appeal Committee also had not found out any genuineness on the grounds pointed out in the appeal, I am not satisfied that the petitioner is entitled for any reliefs in the writ petition. 5. The learned Government Pleader submitted that there is difference of eight marks between the petitioner and the winner team, as the winner team obtained 229 marks and the petitioner's team obtained 221 marks. 6. For all the above reasons, I am not inclined to interfere with the decision in Ext.P6 appeal and, the writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms