SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13958

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
VISHNU P.R. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 7490 OF 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J.G.SYAMNATH
For the Respondents: SURIN GEORGE IPE, RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE, M.G.UNNI

Delay in seeking relief and lack of specific grievances led to dismissal of the petition.

Headnote:The petitioner alleges improper evaluation of performance during the College Youth Festival due to technical issues with the microphone, impacting his qualification for the M.G.University Youth Festival. Court noted the delay in filing and lack of specific references to evaluation defects, denying relief per discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution. As a result, the writ petition is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner claims improper evaluation due to technical failure. (Para 1 , 2)
2. delay in addressing grievances affects court's discretion in granting relief. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

The petitioner seeks for a direction to grant an opportunity to participate in the M.G.University Youth Festival, 2026, for the event Kavithaparayanam (Malayalam).

2. The petitioner alleges that, he had participated in the College Youth Festival and did not get first prize. According to the petitioner, only the first prize winners are permitted to participate in the University Youth Festival and due to defect in the mike arranged at the stage, petitioner’s performance was not evaluated properly.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

4. Petitioner’s appeal allegedly preferred on

11.01.2026, produced as Ext.P3 states that there was an improper evaluation of performance despite compliance with guidelines and due to technical failure etc. There was no specific reference to any defect in the mike. Even other wise, the petitioner is coming on the eve of the University Youth Festival, which is scheduled to take place tomorrow. For the last more than one and half months, petitioner had slept over his rights, if any.

In such circumstances, I do not consider it appropriate to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to give any relief to the petitioners.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top