High Court Kerala High Court

Swathy S.Nath vs General Convenor on 14 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Swathy S.Nath vs General Convenor on 14 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 1675 of 2008(Y)


1. SWATHY S.NATH, AGED 17,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. GENERAL CONVENOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. CONVENOR,

3. REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR,

4. DIRECTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.SASIKUMAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/01/2008

 O R D E R
                               ANTONY DOMINIC, J.



                     = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

                         W.P.(C) No.  1675  OF 2008 Y

                     = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =



                      Dated this the  14 th January, 2008



                                   J U D G M E N T

Petitioner had participated in Classical Music, Kathakali

Sangeetham and Thiruvathira in the District Higher Secondary

School Youth Festival. Aggrieved by the prizes that were awarded,

petitioner filed appeals and those appeals were rejected by Exts. P3

to P5. It is contended before me that the first prize winner in the

Classical Music has committed mistake in Raga. It is also stated

that in the Kathakali Sangeetham, the first prize winner had wrongly

chosen the song. It is also argued that in Thiruvathira the first

prize winner had committed certain mistakes in the steps that she

took during the course of performance.

2. These are too technical matters and only the judges can

assess the performance of the rival candidates. Although the appeal

memos, in relation to Exts. P3 to P5 decisions rendered by the

appeal committee, have not been produced by the petitioner, the

WPC No. 1675/08 -2-

appellate committee in its orders stated that the assessment of

performance by the judges is unassailable. In Exts. P3 and P5, it is

also specifically noted that the judges have noticed the deficiencies

in the performance rendered by the petitioner. In the light of all

these, I do not think that the petitioner has made out a case for

interference.

Writ petition fails and is dismissed.

ANTONY DOMINIC

JUDGE

jan/-