IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2010 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36837 of 2010(D) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- MEHARUNNISSA P.S., (MINOR, AGED 14 YEARS), KARINGATHURUTHI PARAMBU HOUSE, 39, M.A.S.S.ROAD, KOCHI-2, REP. BY HER FATHER, P.H.SAKKEER HUSSAIN. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU MARTIN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECERTARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE CONVENER, DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2010-2011, (MR.C.R.JANARDHANAN, MODEL VHS MOOVATTUPUZHA), PIN-686 661. 4. CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE, MATTANCHERY EDUCATIONAL SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2010-2011, (DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM), PIN-682 030. 5. THE CONVENER, MATTANCHERRY SUB DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2010-2011, (MR.JUDE DON BRITTO, ST.JOSEPH L.P.S. KUMBALANGI), PIN-682 007. R1 & R2 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` W.P.(C) No. 36837 of 2010 D ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's team has participated in the Sub District School Kalolsavam 2010-2011 in the item 'Oppana'. They were given the second prize. Aggrieved by the above, petitioner filed Ext.P5 appeal, which was rejected by Ext.P6. It is challenging Ext.P6, the writ petition is filed. 2. Contention raised is that the grounds raised in Ext.P5 were not properly considered by the appellate committee. First of all, it is pointed out by the learned Government Pleader that the first place winner had secured 268 points and the petitioner had only 252. According to the learned Government Pleader, the appellate committee examined the contentions and found them to be devoid of merits and it was therefore rejected. 3. A reading of Ext.P5 shows that the petitioner did complain that a participant got injured and that due to the W.P.(C) No.36837/10 : 2 : improper arrangement of the stage they could not perform well. This grievance was considered by the appellate committee and they did not find any merit in it. Even otherwise petitioner has not produced any material to substantiate the contention, in which event only, this Court can find Ext.P6 order erroneous. In the absence of such materials, I do not think this Court will be justified in interfering with Ext.P6. Even otherwise by any order passed in the writ petition the existing first prize winner will be affected and the first prize winner is not a party to the writ petition. 4. For these reasons, I am not persuaded to pass any order in the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) aks // True Copy // P.A. To Judge