IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 1136 of 2008(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ROHIT N.AJAYAN (MINOR), AGED 14, S/O.AJAYAN N.S., NEDIYIRIPPIL HOUSE, P.O.KAZHIMBRAM, REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, AJAYAN N.S., AGED 44, S/O.N.V.SREEDHARAN, NEDIYIRIPPIL HOUSE, P.O.KAZHIMBRAM, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THRISSUR. 2. GENERAL CONVENOR, KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2007-2008. 3. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 1136 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated: January 9, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner was a contestant in the Revenue District Youth Festival in Kuchipudi and Folk Dance. In both these items she was given 2nd prize with A grade. According to the petitioner, the judges were unfamiliar with the items performed and that resulted in wrong assessment of performance. 2. From paragraph 6 of the petition it is seen pleaded that the judges were qualified in Ottamthullal, Bharatanatyam and Mohiniyattam. If that be so, one cannot contend that they were unqualified at all. It is also clear from the submission made by the learned Government Pleader that all the three judges have uniformly assessed the 1st prize winner as much better than the petitioner. The 1st prize winner is seen to have secured 245 marks in Kuchipudi whereas the petitioner had obtained only 242 marks. Similarly in folk dance also, while the 1st prize winner got 249 marks, the petitioner got only 241 marks. WP(C) 1136/2008 Page numbers 3. In view of this I can only uphold the assessment of performance by the judges. 3. The petitioner has also made reference to Exts.P1to P5 and contended that in the past he has always been assessed as a Kalaprathibha and winner in other competitions. That by itself cannot be a reason to conclude that the assessment of performance this year vitiated. I do not find any merit in this petition. It is accordingly dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-