IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2011 / 13TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 37726 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JINSHA BASHEER, AGED 17, S/O. MR. P.M.BASHEER, RESIDING AT 4/239, PULIKAL HOUSE, KARIPALAM, MATTANCHERRY P.O., KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 002, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER & NATURE GUARDIAN MRS.JASHMINE BASHEER. BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATIONAL DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHINAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-695 001. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-620 030. 4. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-620 030. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 37726 of 2010 M ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner participated in On-the-spot Work Experience Competition (Higher Secondary School Level) in Kerala School Scientific, Mathematical Science, Social Science Work Experience Competition organised by the third respondent. The item in which she participated was 'Book Binding' and she was awarded the 3rd prize with 'A Grade'. According to the petitioner, result was not published as required in the Mannual and, therefore, she could not prefer an appeal. It is stated that the assessment made by the Judges of the performance of the students was incorrect and, therefore, she should be permitted to appear in the State Level Competition. 2. Learned Government Pleader has obtained instructions in the matter. According to the learned Government Pleader, the result was announced at 8 AM on W.P.(C) No.37726/2010 : 2 : 03-12-2010. It is also stated that on 02-12-2010 at 8.30 PM itself the results were published in the website. Further, according to the learned Government Pleader, the first prize winner had secured 247 marks, the second prize winner had secured 235 marks and the petitioner had secured only 229 marks. It is also submitted that, although the petitioner had an opportunity to file an appeal, the petitioner did not pursue that remedy or even contacted the Convenor of the Competition. 3. First of all, for the reason that the first prize winner and the second prize winner are not parties to this writ petition, no order can be passed in favour of the petitioner and to the prejudice of the aforesaid persons. In that way, the writ petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties. Even otherwise, from the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it is obvious that the petitioner did not pursue the appellate remedy available under the Mannual. That apart, the fact that there is wide disparity in the marks W.P.(C) No.37726/2010 : 3 : obtained by the petitioner as compared to the first and second prize winners also prevents this Court from granting any relief to the petitioner. Writ petition fails and it is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks