IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2011 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 32447 of 2011(E) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- MAAHIR.A.S, (MINOR), ANDRAMMOOCHIKKAL HOUSE, KADANGODU.P.O., ERUMAPETTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. PIN-680 584, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER RAMLA.U.A. BY ADVS. SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER SRI.PRAMJI PAUL VAZHAPPILLI RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE SCHOOL YOUTH FESTIVAL SUB DISTRICT LEVEL APPEAL COMMITTEE, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR.680 001. 3. DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, CHAVAKKAD, THRISSUR DISTRICT.680 586. 4. PROGRAM CONVENER, KERALA STATE SCHOOL REVENUE KALOLSAVAM, IRINGALAKKUDA, THRISSUR. 680 590. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.MUHAMMED SHAH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 32447/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO NISAMMUDDIN.K.H FOR THE YEAR 2010-11. P2: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO ABDULLA.M.A. FOR THE YEAR 2009-10. P3: COPY OF ORDER REJECTING THE APPEAL BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28.11.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 32447 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of December, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's team participated in the Sub District Level Youth Festival and the item was “Kolkali”. There were only two teams and the rival team secured “A” Grade. Aggrieved by this an appeal was filed and that was rejected by Ext.P3 order. It is in these circumstances this writ petition is filed. 2. Since Ext.P3 order does not contain any reason for rejecting the appeal, I called upon the counsel to argue on the merits of the matter. According to him, the stage was defective and that the petitioner had complained about the defective nature of the stage even before they commenced their performance. Without clearing the defect they were compelled to perform on the stage and that led to the inferior ranking. 3. However, the fact remains that the same stage W.P.(C) No. 32447 OF 2011 :2 : was made available for both the participants. If that be so, even if it is assumed that there was any defect in the arrangement of the stage, that defect would have gone to the prejudice of the rival team as well. This means that both the teams were placed in an identical situation and no prejudice specific to the petitioner has been caused. That apart, in the writ petition, the petitioner also has not impleaded the rival team. Therefore the writ petition is also defective for non-joinder of necessary parties Hence I am not persuaded to pass any order in this writ petition and hence the same is dismissed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge