IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2011 / 27TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1515 of 2011(L) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- NIRANJANA. S., AGED 14, MINOR, D/O.PARTHAN, STANDARD IX, A.B.V.H.S.S., MUHAMMA, REPRESENTED BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER SUKUMARY. D., VADAKKEVELY HOUSE, S.L. PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (GENERAL CONVENOR) 51ST KERALA SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2010-2011. PIN-695 001. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ALAPPUZHA, (GENERAL CONVENOR), ALAPPUZHA REVENUE DISTRICT SCHOOL KALOLSAVAM 2010-2011), PIN-688 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.DILEEP MOHAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.1515 OF 2011(L) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2011 J U D G M E N T In the Alappuzha District Revenue Kalolsavam, petitioners team has been participated in the item folk dance. They have been given no prize. They filed appeal and that was rejected by Ext.P4. Therefore the writ petition is filed. 2. Learned Government Pleader who has instructions in the matter submits that while the first prize winner team has got 237 marks and the four second prize winner teams have got 243 marks each, the petitioners' team has got only 220 marks. It is also submitted that in the appeal it was alleged that parts of the bangles were spread on the stage and as a result of which the petitioners could not perform well. In so far as this complaint is concerned it is submitted by the Government Pleader that it was the responsibility of the participants to verify the suitability of the stage before commencing the performance. It is also submitted that though vague allegation of the partiality of the judges were raised, same was not substantiated in any manner. The facts stated by the Government Pleader is not controverted in any WPC.No.1515 /2011 :2 : manner. 3. If that be so, this court will not be justified in issuing any direction. That apart there is wide disparity in the marks secured by the petitioners as compared to the first and 2nd prize winners. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/