IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 2950 of 2009()
1. ANZIL REHMAN K., AGED 15 YEARS, (MINOR),
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE GENERAL CONVENOR,
... Respondent
2. THE CHAIRMAN, APPEAL COMMITTEE,
3. THE PROGRAMME GENERAL CONVENOR,
4. THE TEAM MANAGER,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.K.ABDUL REHIM
Dated :01/01/2010
O R D E R
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ.
-------------------------
W.A.No.2950 of 2009
---------------------------------
Dated, this the 1st day of January, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandra Menon, J.
The grievance of the appellant projected in this writ appeal is
against the denial of opportunity to participate in the District Level
Competitions being held in Malappuram. The case of the
appellant/petitioner is that his performance in the particular event
(Water Colour Painting) was not properly evaluated, and because of
the bias played by the Judges, the appellant was given only the
‘second prize’ with A-grade, while the first prize was given to one
Mr.Mohammed Musthar, who is a student of the School where the
competitions were being held. It is also the case of the appellant
that the drawing teacher of the said school was the programme
convener and the Judge was persuaded by the programme convener
(the above drawing teacher) to give more marks to the said
candidate overlooking the merit and performance of the appellant,
as projected in Ground C of the Memorandum of Writ Appeal.
W.A.No.2950/2009
-2-
2. The learned counsel for the appellant, with reference to
various certificates of merits bagged by the appellant/petitioner,
submits that the impugned verdict passed by the learned Single
Judge is not correct or sustainable, for not having considered the
merits and demerits of the persons concerned. The learned Single
Judge has declined interference observing the contention raised by
the writ petitioner that the successful candidate, who got the first
prize, was the son of the Programme Convener of the School, where
the competition was held, was not a prohibition to the said student.
In fact, the said observation only reflects the general observation as
to the rights and liberties of all candidates to participate in the
competitions, if they are legally entitled otherwise, and nothing
more. The decision has been rendered by the learned Single Judge,
based on the specific observation that comparative analysis of the
merits and demerits of the students participated in the youth
festivals cannot be entertained by invoking the discretionary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is
more so in view of the fact that there is a prescribed forum for
challenging the decision taken by Judges, in ascertaining the merits
W.A.No.2950/2009
-3-
and demerits of the persons concerned, by way of appeal, remitting
the prescribed fees in this regard. The learned counsel for the
appellant submits that the appellant had also preferred an appeal,
but the same happened to be dismissed, which made him to
approach this Court by filing the writ petition. The credentials of
the parties concerned, with specific reference to the grievance
projected by the appellant, appears to have been considered by the
Appeal Committee, and it was after evaluating the relevant facts and
figures that the appeal was dismissed, which in turn has been
endorsed by the learned Single Judge, while declining interference in
the writ petition. We do not find any reason to vary or modify the
impugned verdict.
The writ appeal fails and accordingly it is dismissed as devoid
of any merit.
Sd/-
(P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE)
Sd/-
(C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE)
jg