Judgment Dinesh Maheshwari, J.-The petitioner, Sudhir Sharma has filed this writ petition as natural guardian of his son Piyush Sharma with the submissions that his son took part in a swimming competition conducted by the Director of Secondary Education, Rajasthan in the mane of Rajasthan State School Swimming Competition, 2005 at Sawai Mansingh Stadium, Jaipur and he got first ranking in the competition. The petitioner has produced certificate Annexure-2 on record which shows that his son stood first in the event of “200 Metres Individual Medley.” with the timing of 03.02.63 minutes; petitioner has also produced certificate Annexure-1 which shows that the candidate stood second in the event of “1500 Metres Freestyle” with the timing of 24:14:00. It is submitted that the petitioners son was called for selection in the National Swimming Competition for practice and training and a copy of the letter issued by the District Education Officer (Secondary), Jodhpur addressed to the Principal of the School where son of the petitioner is studying, has been produced as Annexure-3. The said letter reads as under,- Þdk;kZy; ftyk fk{kk vf /kdkjh ¼ek/;fed½ fk{kk foHkkx ¼jktLFkku½ d ftf kv ek/;@tks/k@[ksn@2005@343 fnukad 07@11@2005 Øekaydw iz/kkukpk;Z] s lsUV ,Ul m-ek-fo- tks/kiqj fo"k; & jk"Vªh; rSjkdh izfr;ksfxrk esa Nk= ds p;u ckcr~ A izlax & funskky; chdkusj ds nwjHkk"k lansk fnukad 07@11@2005 ds Øe esaA mi;ä fo"k;kUrxZr ,oa izklafxd nwjHkk"k lansk ds lanHkZ esa ys[k gS fd vkids fo|ky; esa v/;;ujr Nk= fi;l kekZ dk jk"Vªh; rSjkdh izfr;kswfxrk 2005&2006 esa p;u gksus ds QyLo:i d.Mªh Ldwvki bUgsa fnukad 09@11@2005 dks flfoy ykbZu lSy dksVk ¼jktLFkku½ easvfuok;Z :i ls viuh mifLFkfr nsus gsrq ikcUn djsaA mä Nk=@Nk=k dk fnukad 10@11@ 2005 ls 11 @11@2005 rd iwoZ vH;kl gksxk rRipkr~ fnukad 12@11@ 2005 ls 18 @11@2005 rd dsEi flfoy ykbZu d.Mªh Ldwy dksVk ¼jktLFkku½ esa vk;ks lST; gksxkA vfrfjä tkudkjh gsrq flfoy ykbZu lSd.Mªh Ldwy dksVk ¼jktLFkku½ ds iz/kkukpk;Z ds nwjHkk"k uEcj 94145 68824 ij lEidZ djsaA gLrk{kj ftyk f k{kk vf /kdkjh ¼ek/;fed½ fk{kk foHkkx ¼jktLFkku½ 2. The petitioner has alleged that on the basis of call letter Annexure-3, the training camp was attended as is evidenced from certificate Annexure-4. The petitioner has alleged that on the basis of call letter Annexure-3, the training camp was attended as is evidenced from certificate Annexure-4. In view of the standing of the son of the petitioner, he was eligible to be selected for National Championship which have commenced at Hyderabad from 211.2005 but the respondents did not select him on the basis of the authorities conducting a time trial which was not conducted in a proper pool and otherwise the son of the petitioner having stood in higher ranking, he ought to have been selected for Nationals. 3. This writ petition submitted on 111.2005 and was taken up on 111.2005 when it was pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the National Swimming Championship was starting from 211.2005 and looking to the grievance raised and urgency of the matter, short notice was issued returnable today and a copy of the writ petition was given in advance to the learned Deputy Government Advocate to complete his instructions and to make submissions before the Court. 4. In response to the notice, the learned Deputy Government Advocate has pointed out that the respondents have not proceeded on any irrational basis and selections for participation in National Championship were made having regard to the timings of the individuals and with reference to the standards of timings fixed for such participation for the event of “200 Metres Individual Medley”, as against the standard of the timing for the Nationals of 02:37:99 minutes, the son of the petitioner has clocked 03:02:63 minutes at State Championship and 2:50:03 at the trials. Similarly, for the event of “1500 Meters Freestyle”, as against the standard of 21:47:19 minutes, he clocked 24:14:00 at the State Championship and 24:00:73 at the trials. The timings of the son of the petitioner being disproportionately low and inappropriate, he was not considered fit to be selected for participation in the National Championship. 5. Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is satisfied that the respondents have not acted on irrational basis or criteria and have not deprived the son of the petitioner of any of his legitimate right. The grievance sought to be raised about length of the pool at the trails is wholly baseless. 5. Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is satisfied that the respondents have not acted on irrational basis or criteria and have not deprived the son of the petitioner of any of his legitimate right. The grievance sought to be raised about length of the pool at the trails is wholly baseless. Same swimming pool ought to have been used by all the competitors and significantly, when there is no grievance about the pool at the State Championship, the timings of the candidate thereat are also far short of the standards. 6. It appears that the dispute has its origin in the phraseology of letter Annexure-3 as quoted hereinabove, which, by its tenor gave out a sense of expectation to the candidate, as if he had already been selected and has been called in the training camp. Learned Deputy Government Advocate frankly conceded that the phraseology of letter Annexure-3 is not appropriate which has given rise to this controversy. The Department should remain careful while issuing such letters particularly as they have an impact on the morale of the young sportsman. However, so far the legal rights are concerned, there being no infringement of any legal right, no cause is available in the writ petition. 7. The writ petition fails and is dismissed. No order as to costs.