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. 682 of 2010(I) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- RAKHI BALACHANDRAN (MINOR), AGED 16 YEARS, REP. BY HER FATHER, BALACHANDRAN K., S/O.KUTTAPPAN, RAKHI NIVAS, THEKKEVILA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.SHABU SREEDHARAN, MR.N.A.JOHN JACOB, MR.P.SANJAY SHENOI. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KOLLAM. R1 & R2 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. 682 of 2010-I - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is a Plus Two student of Mayyanad Higher Secondary School. She participated in the item Bharata Natyam in Kollam Revenue District Youth Festival for Girls in Higher Secondary School level. The petitioner secured Second A Grade and one Reshma Murali secured First A Grade. Aggrieved by the result, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the second respondent. The candidate who secured Third A grade has also preferred appeal. The same stands rejected. Aggrieved by the same, this writ petition is filed. 2. The main allegation is raised against one of the judges who adjudged the competition. It is the case of the petitioner that one RLV Pradeep has been included in the 8 number judging panel. He has acted as the tutor of the participant who got First A Grade. It is alleged that the other judges have been influenced by the said Pradeep in awarding more marks to the first prize winner. 3. Going by the averments in the writ petition, no serious infirmities have been pointed out with regard to the assignment of marks to the wpc 682 /2010 2 petitioner and the other participants. The allegation of bias is also not proved by cogent evidence. This Court will be loath to interfere in such matters unless sufficient grounds are made out. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/