IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 724 of 2010(M) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- SHAREEJA T.P, AGED 15 YEARS REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER, T.P.MUHAMMAD DR.K.B.M.M.H.S. THRITHALA, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. MR.JIJI THOMAS PAMBACKAL, SMT.SMITHA JIJI PAMBACKAL. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION GENERAL CONVENER, APPEAL COMMITTEE, PALAKKAD. 3. REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR APPEAL COMMITTEE,PALAKKAD. 4. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR V.H.S.E, PALAKKAD. 5. O.M. KARUVARAKUNDU MEMBER OF JUDGING COMMITTE,OPPANA GIRLS PALAKKAD. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 724 of 2010-M - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a team leader representing KBMMHS, Thrithala and was a contestant for the Revenue District level competition held at Ottappalam in Palakkad district in the event Oppana (Girls). The petitioner's team has obtained first place with A grade in the Thrithala Sub District School Kalolsavam 2009-2010 which is evidenced by Exts.P1 to P1 (i). It is the case of the petitioner that even though the petitioner's team performed well in the District level Kerala Kalolsavam, they were not considered for giving first prize. 2. The petitioner submits that there were various technical irregularities while conducting the programme. The petitioner alleges personal bias against the 6th respondent also in awarding marks. Even though the petitioner filed an appeal against the awarding of marks, that was rejected as per Ext.P4. 3. A reading of Ext.P4 shows that there is no merit in the contentions raised by the petitioner. The complaint raised against the 6th respondent was also not found correct. In the light of the fact that the appeal wpc724 /2010 2 committee could not find any technical faults or other factors which affected the performance of the petitioner's team, I do not find any reason to interfere with the result of the competition. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/