Judges' evaluations in cultural competitions are final and not subject to judicial review unless severe irregularities or mala fides are proven.

JUDGMENT

The captioned writ petitions are materially connected in respect of elimination of the petitioners in the intra college competition of cultural and other events by the St. Alberts College, Ernakulam and Union Christion College Aluva respectively; thus disabling them from participating in the MG University Youth Festival scheduled to be held from 08.02.2023 to 12.02.2013 at Ernakulam.

2. The contention advanced by the petitioners is that they performed well than the first prize winners in the college level competitions and therefore, the award of marks to the first prize winner cannot be sustained under law.

3. It is further pointed out that during the previous years, A grade was secured in various cultural events and therefore, the action of the Judges in not awarding the first place to the petitioners enabling them to participate in the Mahatma Gandhi University inter collegiate Youth Festival is illegal and arbitrary; and therefore liable to be interfered with by this Court.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University as well as respective colleges have opposed the reliefs sought for by the petitioners to permit them to participate in the Mohiniyattam as well as Kavitha Parayanam (Malayalam) in the inter college Youth Festival conducted by the Mahatma Gandhi University.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners Sri.

P.P. Biju and Sri. Sravan M.S., and the learned Standing Counsel for the Mahatma University Sri. Surin George Ipe, and perused the pleadings and material on record.

6. In my considered opinion, the intra college competitions are conducted in order to identify the successful candidates in various cultural events so as to represent the college in the Mahatma Gandhi University Youth Festival. The Judges are assigning marks to the participants taking into account the performance of the participants on the day in question. Merely because the participants have secured A grade or have won first place in the respective events during the previous years, that is not a ground to assign the first place or A grade to such candidates. There is no case for the petitioners that the Judges who evaluated the petitioners, have acted mala fide or have any grudge against them.

7. The question with respect to the interference in the award of the marks in Youth Festival and the orders passed by the appellate authority was considered by this Court in Rhony Chandra Mohan v. General Convenor Balakalotsavan and Yuvajanotsavam [1992 KHC 211=1992(1) KLJ 515] and held as follows:

4. It needs no reiteration that the award of marks and ranks in a contest of this nature is primarily the duty and responsibility of the Judges who have been appointed to judge on the merits or demerits of the various contestants. It is also a well - known fact that the ultimate difference between the top notchers in such contests is very often marginal and little and the ranks go by very low differences in marks. But that is inevitable. The judges who are experts react differently from different angles and they have different perceptions. It is not possible to have any absolute standards or absolute judges who react alike in all situations. It is precisely because of this that there is a multiplicity of judges for such contests, so that the individual predictions or tastes or ideas of one are offset by the sensitivities of the others. Since computers cannot be judges, nor the judges automations, differences based on individual perceptions are inevitable and have to be accepted. This system of assessment has therefore been adopted for the purpose of assessing the relative merit and the authorities have to depend upon the judgment of the judges appointed for the purpose. May be a different set of judges may take a different view of the matter. But that does not mean that the assessment of merits by one set of judges is lacking in validity or otherwise irregular. Assessment of merit is ultimately a matter of objective assessment by a set of i