IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 879 of 2010(H) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ASWATHI BALAKRISHNAN, REP.BY GUARDIAN MOTHER, JAYANTHY.P., AGED 37 YEARS, DIJIL NIVAS, MOUVANCHERRI P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE APPEAL COMMITTEE, REP.BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KANNUR REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM. (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR). R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 879 of 2010-H - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner and her team contested in the item Group Dance in high school section in the Kannur Revenue District Youth Festival. They secured A grade with third place. Aggrieved by the same, an appeal was filed which was also rejected as per Ext.P1. It is submitted that there had been favouritism and mal practice in the award of marks and the assessment of performance. It is also pointed out that the schedule of the programme was not in a scientific manner. 2. A reading of Ext.P1 shows that there is a difference of 9 marks between the winning team and the petitioner's team. The appeal committee found that there was no technical flaws, as pointed out by the petitioner. In these circumstances, the appeal was dismissed. This Court, sitting under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot interfere with such aspects, without any patent illegalities being pointed out. I am not satisfied that the petitioner has raised sufficient grounds to interfere with the result adjudged. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/