IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34408 of 2010(A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ ANJALI SANKAR, 17 YEARS (MINOR), REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND GUARDIAN K.G.LALITHA, 49 YEARS, W/O.SANKAR, VADAKILEDATH HOUSE, NELLAD P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.S.PRAVEEN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661. 2. THE ASSISTANT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, S.N.D.P.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN-686 661. 4. G.GARGI, D/O.GOPAKUMAR, PLUZ ONE (SCIENCE) STUDENT, S.N.D.P.HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MUVATTUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER, PIN-686 661. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No.34408 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 18th November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a 12th standard student of the 3rd respondent school. In this writ petition the grievance is that she is not selected for Sub District Level Competition. 2. According to the petitioner, initially she was chosen but however, steps are now taken by the 3rd respondent for sending the 4th respondent. When this case came up for orders on 16.11.2010 having regard to the nature of the allegations raised, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to get instructions in the matter. Accordingly, learned Government Pleader has obtained written instructions from the school, a copy of which was made available before this Court. It is stated that in the item Bharathanatyam, apart from the petitioner, fourth respondent, a 11th standard student, was also a participant. It is stated that both of them secured equal ranking. It is stated that Manual governing the conduct of Youth Festival is silent about the method to be W.P (C) No.34408 of 2010 2 adopted when there is a tie as in this case and therefore with the consent of both students, fourth respondent was decided to be sent to the Youth Festival on the basis of a toss . It is stated that the method was accepted by the school with the consent of both the students and that therefore Principal cannot be faulted for the decision that was taken. 3. There is no reason to doubt the bona fides of the Principal. If as stated when there was a tie and a decision was taken with the agreement of the students and on the basis of toss, the 4th respondent was chosen, Principal cannot be faulted. Therefore no relief can be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that being a 12th standard student, it will be beneficial for the petitioner if she is allowed to participate. It is also his contention that nothing prevents the school from sending two participants for Sub District Level Competition. However, in the absence of an enabling provision in the Manual authorising the school to send more than one participant, I am not in a position to accept this contention W.P (C) No.34408 of 2010 3 and direct the school to send the petitioner also for the Youth Festival. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma