IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM FRIDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2010 / 11TH POUSHA 1931 WA.No. 2950 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.37601/2009 Dated 23/12/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ ANZIL REHMAN K., AGED 15 YEARS (MINOR), XTH STANDARD STUDENT, SUBULUSALAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MOORKANAD, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REP. BY HIS FATHER AND GUARDIAN ANWER K., 'SHABNAM', UGRAPURAM P.O., AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN RESPONDENT(S): /RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. THE GENERAL CONVENOR, REVENUE DISTRICT YOUTH FESTIVAL, (DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, MALAPPURAM). 2. THE CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE, AREACODE SUB DISTRICT YOUTH FESTIVAL, (DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, WANDOOR). 3. THE PROGRAMME GENERAL CONVENOR, AREACODE SUB DISTRICT YOUTH FESTIVAL, (HEADMISTRESS, G.H.S.S., AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT). 4. THE TEAM MANAGER, SUBULUSALAM HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MOORKANAD, AREACODE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. MR.K.B.PRADEEP, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------- W.A.No.2950 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 1st day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ramachandra Menon, J. The grievance of the appellant projected in this writ appeal is against the denial of opportunity to participate in the District Level Competitions being held in Malappuram. The case of the appellant/petitioner is that his performance in the particular event (Water Colour Painting) was not properly evaluated, and because of the bias played by the Judges, the appellant was given only the 'second prize' with A-grade, while the first prize was given to one Mr.Mohammed Musthar, who is a student of the School where the competitions were being held. It is also the case of the appellant that the drawing teacher of the said school was the programme convener and the Judge was persuaded by the programme convener (the above drawing teacher) to give more marks to the said candidate overlooking the merit and performance of the appellant, as projected in Ground C of the Memorandum of Writ Appeal. W.A.No.2950/2009 -2- 2. The learned counsel for the appellant, with reference to various certificates of merits bagged by the appellant/petitioner, submits that the impugned verdict passed by the learned Single Judge is not correct or sustainable, for not having considered the merits and demerits of the persons concerned. The learned Single Judge has declined interference observing the contention raised by the writ petitioner that the successful candidate, who got the first prize, was the son of the Programme Convener of the School, where the competition was held, was not a prohibition to the said student. In fact, the said observation only reflects the general observation as to the rights and liberties of all candidates to participate in the competitions, if they are legally entitled otherwise, and nothing more. The decision has been rendered by the learned Single Judge, based on the specific observation that comparative analysis of the merits and demerits of the students participated in the youth festivals cannot be entertained by invoking the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is more so in view of the fact that there is a prescribed forum for challenging the decision taken by Judges, in ascertaining the merits W.A.No.2950/2009 -3- and demerits of the persons concerned, by way of appeal, remitting the prescribed fees in this regard. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had also preferred an appeal, but the same happened to be dismissed, which made him to approach this Court by filing the writ petition. The credentials of the parties concerned, with specific reference to the grievance projected by the appellant, appears to have been considered by the Appeal Committee, and it was after evaluating the relevant facts and figures that the appeal was dismissed, which in turn has been endorsed by the learned Single Judge, while declining interference in the writ petition. We do not find any reason to vary or modify the impugned verdict. The writ appeal fails and accordingly it is dismissed as devoid of any merit. Sd/- (P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) Sd/- (C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE) jg