IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2126 of 2011(M) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- JITHIN. P., AGED 17 YEARS, S/O.SARASWATHY. P., KUNHIVALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O.VELLOOR, PIN-670 346, KANNUR DISTRICT, TEAM LEADER "DRAMA" COMPETITION, GOVERNMENT HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, VELLOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY HIS MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND SARASWATHY P., W/O.KRISHNAN, KUNHIVALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O. VELLOOR, PIN – 670 346, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.HARISH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 2. THE GENERAL CONVENOR, ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, KERALA STATE SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM 2010-2011, OFFICE OF THE D.P.I., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 3. THE GENERAL CONVENOR, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, KANNUR REVENUE DISTRICT, KERALA SCHOOL KALOTSAVAM 2010-2011, OFFICE OF THE D.D.E.KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 670 001. 4. THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER, KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 671 001. 5. THE 'DRAMA TROUP" (NADAKAM COMPETITION) GOVERNMENT BRENNAN HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN – 671 001. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P (C) No. 2126 of 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th January, 2011 J U D G M E N T In the Kannur Revenue District Kerala School Kalolsavam, petitioner's team participated in the item "Drama". They were given third place with A Grade. Appeal filed was rejected by Ext.P2. The contention raised is that the stage super curtain was defective and therefore the performance was affected. Even if the contention about the defect of the curtain is accepted, it is to be noted that all the participants have performed in the same stage with similar facilities. If that be so, it cannot be said that any prejudice special to the petitioner has been caused. 2. It is also contended that during the performance Judges were speaking to somebody over mobile phone and that the first prize has been given to the school which hosted the youth festival. First of all these contentions are not seen urged in the appeal. That apart the fact that prize has been given to the school which hosted the youth festival does not mean that the W.P (C) No. 2126 of 2011 2 assessment of performance by the Judges is erroneous for that reason. Writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge