JUDGMENT : Since common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions, they are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The 'Kerala School Kalolsavam' is the arts festival of students of LP, UP, HS, HSS, VHSS of Govt./aided and recognized un-aided schools under General Education Department of the State. It is conducted by the General Education Department. The Department has introduced Kerala School Kalolsava Manual (hereinafter referred to as the 'Manual' for short) laying down guidelines for the conduct of the Kalolsavam. The students who obtain grades in the State level competitions are given academic grace marks as well as cultural scholarships as prescribed by the Manual. The competitions are held at four levels namely, School, Sub-District, Revenue District and State. Only those who get a top score with 'A' grade can participate in the next level of competition. 3. The petitioners in these writ petitions were participants in the Revenue District Level School Kalolsavam, 2022-2023. As per clause 10.20 of Chapter 10 of the Manual, only the candidates who get 'A' Grade with the top most mark in an item of competition in the Revenue District Level School Kalolsavam can participate in the State School Kalolsavam. The School Kalolsavams in various Revenue Districts were held during the last week of November and first week of December, 2022. The State level festival, viz; Kerala School Kalolsavam 2022-2023, is slated to be held from 03.01.2023 to 07.01.2023 at Kozhikode. The petitioners in these writ petitions are minors, represented by their parents/guardians, who could not qualify for participation in the State level Kerala School Kalolsavam as they could not get top score in their events in the respective revenue districts. Accordingly, they preferred appeals before the Revenue District Level Appellate Committee constituted as per the Manual. Since the appeals were rejected, they have filed these writ petitions. 4. Clauses 14 to 16 of Chapter 10 of the Manual provide as follows: “10.14 There will be an Appeals Committee to consider complaints regarding the results of competitions. The technical and legal aspects of the competitions should be considered in the Appeals Committee. No revaluation or redistribution is required. The video record can also be checked, if needed, to rule on appeals. There should be an order of action with causal analysis to adjudicate the appeal. The prescribed form should be as given in Appendix III. The technical and legal aspects of the competitions should be considered in the Appeals Committee. No revaluation or redistribution is required. The video record can also be checked, if needed, to rule on appeals. There should be an order of action with causal analysis to adjudicate the appeal. The prescribed form should be as given in Appendix III. 10.15 The appeal fee at the revenue level competition will be Rs. 2000/-. If the decision of the appeal is favorable, the entire appeal fee will be refunded. 10.16 The decision of the Appeals Committee shall be final.” Chapter 13 of the Manual deals with appeal committees including the Revenue District Level Appellate Committee. The provisions as to Revenue District Level Appellate Committee read as follows: “Revenue District Level Appeal Committee: 1. An Appeal Committee shall be constituted comprising of the Deputy Director of Education and the RDD (HSE) and the VHSE Assistant Director of the respective areas to decide on any grievances against the adjudication of the Revenue District Arts Festival. The Appeal Committee will have 9 members, including the Chairman, prominent artists working in the following various fields of art should be nominated with the consent of the Deputy Director as members. The Convener shall have the power to include experts in any category other than these if required. 1. Expert in Classical dances 2. Expert in Light music 3. Expert in Instrumental music 4. Expert in Painting 5. Expert in Percussion 6. Expert in Linguistics. 2. The term of the Appeal Committee shall be one year or until the formation of the Official Committee for the next year. The official order for the formation of the Appeal Committee is to be issued by the Deputy Director of Education. 3. The CV/bio-data of the members of the Appeal Committee shall be kept by the Chairman. 4. The District Level Appeal Committee should consider only the technical and legal matters and issue a detailed order along with the necessary reasons. 5. Complaints along with a fee of Rs.2000/-within one hour of declaration of the District level competition results should be prepared in the format given in Appendix 2 and submitted to the concerned General Convener by the Competitor/Team Manager. If the decision of the appeal is favourable, the entire appeal fee will be refunded. If not, the amount should be handed over to the Organizing Committee of the Festival. 6. If the decision of the appeal is favourable, the entire appeal fee will be refunded. If not, the amount should be handed over to the Organizing Committee of the Festival. 6. Complaints should be examined in detail by the Appeal Committee and a decision should be taken five days/before the State level Arts festival (whichever is earlier). The decision must be communicated in writing to those concerned. 7. The minutes of the Appeal Committee shall be recorded in a register and a copy of the Minutes shall be sent to the Director of General Education immediately after the Appeal Committee meets. 8. The above instructions will be implemented subject to orders issued by the Government from time to time.” 5. The evaluation of marks by the judges and the decision of the Revenue District Level Appeal Committees in appeals are challenged on various grounds. The petitioners have sought for direction to the authorities to permit them to participate in their respective items in the Kerala School Kalolsavam 2022-2023, to be held at the State level from 03.01.2023 to 07.01.2023 at Kozhikode. 6. The gist of the contentions in the writ petitions is as follows: W.P. (C) No.42719/2022 7. The petitioner participated in the dance event “Kuchupudi (Girls)” in the Higher Secondary Section in the Kottayam Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. According to the petitioner, while she entered the stage, the stage was not maintained properly and there were many ornaments of other students lying on the floor and as a result, the plate used for Kuchipudi was not moving with ease. In spite of the same, the petitioner managed to perform well; but was awarded only 2nd place and the first place was given to a contestant who had deviated from the art form 'Kuchipudi' and the petitioner could not perform well in the competition. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal, the same was rejected by Ext.P1. In Ext.P1, the appeal committee has stated that on examination of the video records and the report of the stage manager, no technical errors could be noted and the score sheets show that there is huge difference in marks scored by the contestant placed in 1st position and the petitioner. The petitioner contends that the appeal committee failed to consider the grounds raised by her in the proper perspective. The petitioner contends that the appeal committee failed to consider the grounds raised by her in the proper perspective. The petitioner states that she is in her 12th grade next year and has to focus on her studies and would not get a further chance to participate in the State level competition and prays for direction to quash Ext.P1 and to permit her to participate in the item 'Kuchipudi' (Girls) at the Kerala School Kalolsavam 2022-2023. W.P.C No.42720/2022 8. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner in W.P. (c) 42719 of 2022, aggrieved by the marks awarded to her for the dance item “Kerala Nadanam” in the Higher Secondary Section in the Kottayam Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. According to the petitioner, the judges had no knowledge of the art form 'Kerala Nadanam' and there was no proper evaluation of her performance. The petitioner relies on clause 10.12 of the Manual which provides that, after the competition, the stage manager must tabulate the marks in the presence of the judges and the result shall be announced on the same stage by one of the judges and contends that contrary to the stipulation in clause 10.12, the judges left the stage immediately after the competition before tabulating the marks and the marks were declared after half an hour. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal, the same was rejected by Ext.P4 order without considering the grounds raised by her and merely stating that on examination of the video records and score sheet, the petitioner was given marks commensurate with her performance. W.P.C No.42722/2022 9. The petitioner in this case is the sister of the petitioner in W.P. (C) No.42719 of 2022 and W.P. (C) 42720 of 2022 and was a participant for the competition “Kerala Nadanam (Girls)” in the High School Section in the Kottayam Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 2022-23. The petitioner secured only second place and could not qualify for the State level kalolsavam. According to the petitioner, the judges had no knowledge of the art form 'Kerala Nadanam' and there was no proper evaluation of the performance of the petitioner and the appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected by Ext. P1 cryptic order stating that the marks awarded were as per the performance. W.P.C No.42761/2022 10. The petitioner participated in “Nadodi Nritham (Girls)” (HSS General) in Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. P1 cryptic order stating that the marks awarded were as per the performance. W.P.C No.42761/2022 10. The petitioner participated in “Nadodi Nritham (Girls)” (HSS General) in Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. According to the petitioner, the stage arrangement made by the respondents was very poor and there was variation in sound system which had affected her performance adversely. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal as per the Manual, the same was rejected by Ext.P4, which is a non speaking order. W.P.C No.42767/2022 11. The petitioner was a participant in the dance event “Bharathanatyam” in the Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 2022-23. According to the petitioner, while the competition was going on, the carpet laid on the floor slipped and therefore the petitioner could not perform well and the 6th respondent who did not perform equally well was awarded first place. The petitioner preferred an appeal and the appeal committee rejected the same by Ext.P3 stating that there is a difference of 14 marks from the contestant who secured first place and that all contestants performed in the same stage. W.P.C No.42775/2022 12. The petitioner was a participant for the item “Group Dance” in Kollam Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. According to the petitioner, one of the judges awarded higher marks to the team led by the 5th respondent for extraneous considerations and the team of the petitioner could secure only second place. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected by Ext.P2 without examining the legal and technical aspects. Hence, the writ petition. W.P.C No.42786/2022 13. The petitioner was a contestant for the dance item “Mohiniyattam(Girls)” in Malappuram Revenue District Kalolsavam 2022-2023. According to the petitioner, a pin lying on the stage injured her foot and she could not perform well and was awarded only 2nd place and could not qualify for the State Level youth festival. The petitioner has a further case that there was no expert in classical dance in the appeal committee and that the appeal preferred by her was rejected by Ext.P3 without appreciating her contentions. The petitioner also points out that she had also participated in 'Kathakali' and 'Ottan Thullal' competitions, in which she secured 1st place with A grade. W.P.C No.42754/2022 14. The petitioner was a participant for the item “Mridangam” in Kottayam Revenue District Kalolsavam. The petitioner also points out that she had also participated in 'Kathakali' and 'Ottan Thullal' competitions, in which she secured 1st place with A grade. W.P.C No.42754/2022 14. The petitioner was a participant for the item “Mridangam” in Kottayam Revenue District Kalolsavam. According to the petitioner, there was no proper evaluation of his performance and the result is vitiated by political interference. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected without due application of mind. W.P.C No.42816/2022 15. The petitioners were contestants for the item “Vattapattu” (Boys) (HSS General) in Kollam Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 2022-23. The grievance of the petitioners is that while their performance was going on in the stage, the curtain was lowered and when the curtain was raised, the mike fell down and therefore, they could not perform well and they were placed only in the 3rd place. The appeal preferred by the petitioners was rejected by Ext.P3 by stating that on examination of the video, there is no substance in the contention of the petitioners. W.P.C No.42815/2022 16. The petitioner was a contestant for the dance item “Keralanadanam” (Girls) (HSS General) in Kollam Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 2022-23. According to the petitioner, the stage arrangement made by the organizers was very poor and it affected her performance. She preferred an appeal before the appeal committee which was dismissed by Ext.P3 which is a non speaking order. W.P.C No.42797/2022 17. The petitioner was a participant in “Kathaprasangam” (HS General) in Kozhikode Revenue District Level School Kalolsavam. According to the petitioner, during the course of the performance, there occurred some issues with the audio system and as a result, there was less clarity at some portions of the performance and thereby the team lost the pace and coordination. It is also contended that the stage was small, slippery and was not stable and was shaking and all these adversely affected the performance of the petitioner and her team members and the team was awarded only 2nd place with A grade in the competition. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal pointing out all these aspects, the appeal committee by Ext.P3 rejected the same stating that the stage was found suitable for performance of charted items by experts before the commencement of the competitions and on examination of the report of the stage manager, the contentions of the petitioner cannot be sustained. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal pointing out all these aspects, the appeal committee by Ext.P3 rejected the same stating that the stage was found suitable for performance of charted items by experts before the commencement of the competitions and on examination of the report of the stage manager, the contentions of the petitioner cannot be sustained. The petitioner contends that Ext.P3 is a cyclostyled order passed without application of mind. W.P.C Nos.42788/2022 & 42769/2022 18. The petitioners in these writ petitions were participants in “Kuchuppudi (Girls) HSS category” in Kozhikode Revenue District School Kalolsavam. According to the petitioners, there was a hole in the stage and as a result of the same, they lost their balance while performing. Though in view of complaints a carpet was put, it was not stuck properly to the floor, due to which the carpet was slipping and sliding while the petitioners were performing and all these adversely affected their performance. The petitioners have produced photographs of the stage in support of their contention that the stage was not fit for performance. Though the petitioners preferred an appeal, the appeal committee rejected the same by Ext.P7 stating that the stage was found suitable for performance of charted items by experts before the commencement of the competitions and on examination of the report of the stage manager, the contentions of the petitioners cannot be sustained. The petitioners point out that Ext.P7 is an order passed without application of mind and Ext.P7 is in the form of a cyclostyled order issued to every contestants who have preferred appeal against the decision of the judges. The petitioners contend that the stage was not inspected and approved prior to the dance event and there was no quality check of the stage. W.P.C No.42040/2022 19. The petitioners were participants in “Nadanpattu” competition in the Pathanamthitta Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. The petitioners could secure only 3rd place and could not qualify for the State level competition. According to the petitioners, they could not perform well and could not secure 1st place due to organizing laches and technical glitch of the sound system. They also contend that there was level difference and shortage of space in the stage. Though an appeal was preferred, the same was rejected by Ext.P2 stating that all the participants performed in the very same stage and that the petitioners cannot complain about the stage conditions. They also contend that there was level difference and shortage of space in the stage. Though an appeal was preferred, the same was rejected by Ext.P2 stating that all the participants performed in the very same stage and that the petitioners cannot complain about the stage conditions. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the contestants placed at the 2nd place preferred an appeal and their appeal has been allowed. The learned Government Pleader, after referring to the tabulation sheet, points out that the difference in the marks awarded to the candidates placed at the 2nd place and the candidates placed at 1st place is very narrow and the same was the reason for allowing their appeal. W.P.C No.42157/2022 20. The petitioner participated in the Kozhikode Revenue District School Kalolsavam for the event “Drama”. According to the petitioner, the team led by the petitioner could secure only 3rd place in the competition due to poor stage arrangements including lighting facilities. The petitioner preferred appeal and the appeal committee by Ext.P2 rejected the same stating that the stage was inspected before the competition and was found to be not defective. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P2 has been passed without considering any of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the appeal. W.P.C No.42438/2022 21. The petitioner was a participant in the “Bharathanatyam” competition at the Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District Level Kalolsavam held on 23.11.2022. According to the petitioner she performed well but the judges failed to appreciate her performance. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal, the same was rejected by Ext.P3 ignoring the report placed before the appellate committee to the effect that the petitioner performed well and the appeal is to be allowed. W.P.C No.42679/2022 22. The petitioner led a 10 member team for the “Malayalam Drama” competition in Ernakulam Revenue District School Kalolsavam. The petitioner’s team could not qualify for the State level kalolsavam as the stage arrangements were defective inasmuch as the curtain was not raised when the drama started. Since the curtain was not raised even after the drama was started, the children had to be in stage without knowing what they should do and this affected their performance adversely. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was rejected by Ext.P1. It is contended that Ext.P1 has been passed without proper application of mind. Since the curtain was not raised even after the drama was started, the children had to be in stage without knowing what they should do and this affected their performance adversely. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was rejected by Ext.P1. It is contended that Ext.P1 has been passed without proper application of mind. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that though it has been stated that the order in appeal was passed after examining the video of the event, there was no such examination. The learned counsel further submits that even the judges could not watch the drama from the beginning as the curtain was raised only few minutes after the drama started. W.P.C No.42052/2022 23. The petitioner was a participant for the event “Mohiniyattam (HS)” in Alappuzha Revenue District Kalolsavam 2022-23. The petitioner contends that there was defect in the sound system and the performance of the petitioner was not properly evaluated by the judges and the decision was influenced by extraneous considerations. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal against the decision of the judges, the same was rejected by Ext.P1. The petitioner contends that none of the contentions raised by the petitioner in the appeal was considered in Ext.P1 and the appeal has been rejected without appreciating relevant facts and circumstances. W.P.C No.41729/2022 24. The petitioner was a participant in “Group Song” in Pathanamthitta Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-2023. According to the petitioner, the maximum time stipulated for performance of group song is 10 minutes. However, the team which secured first place overshoot the allotted time and was liable to be disqualified. However, the said team was given first place and the petitioner got only 2nd place. The petitioner also states that the audio system was poor and this affected their performance. The petitioner preferred an appeal which was rejected by the appeal committee by Ext. P1 without considering her contentions. W.P.C No.42238/2022 25. The petitioner was the group captain for the event “Dafmuttu (Boys) in Palakkad Revenue District Level Kalolsavam 2022-2023. According to the petitioner, the team was marginalized by reducing the mark intentionally and placed at 2nd place and could not qualify for the State level Kalolsavam. The petitioner submits that there was defect in the mike allotted to them during the performance and the same has adversely affected their result. Though an appeal was preferred, the same was rejected by Ext.P1. The petitioner submits that there was defect in the mike allotted to them during the performance and the same has adversely affected their result. Though an appeal was preferred, the same was rejected by Ext.P1. As directed by this Court, a tabulation sheet has been produced before me by the learned Government Pleader and it is seen therefrom that the team led by the petitioner secured 258 marks whereas the team which was placed first has been awarded 260 marks and there is a difference of two marks. In Ext.P1 order, the appeal committee has stated that after examining the video, judge’s mark sheet, tabulation sheet and the stage manager’s report, the contention of the petitioner was found not sustainable and rejected the appeal. W.P.C No.40794/2022 26. The petitioner participated in “Bharathanatyam” in Kannur Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23. According to the petitioner, the stage for performance was uneven and there were plenty of stray nails on the floor and that affected her performance. Since the petitioner could not secure marks as expected, the petitioner preferred an appeal which was rejected by Ex.P9. W.P.C No.42269/2022 27. The petitioner participated in “Kuchupudi (Girls)/HSS” in Idukki Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-2023. According to the petitioner, due to the fault on the part of the authorities in arranging the stage properly, her foot got injured by safety pin which was lying on the stage and the same affected her performance and she could not secure first place as expected. Though the petitioner preferred an appeal, the appeal was rejected by Ext.P1. The appeal committee observed that on examining the video of the event, they could not find any technical or legal issues warranting interference. W.P.C No.42307/2022 28. The petitioners participated in Ernakulam Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-23 for the event “Thiruvathira”. The petitioners could secure only second place and could not therefore qualify for the State Kalolsavam. According to the petitioners, the stage on which they performed was uneven and irregular. The floor shook and trembled and the same triggered the mike and the same affected the rhythm of performance. The uneven stage also twisted the feet of the performers which made it inconvenient and painful for them to perform. The petitioners contend that this adversely affected their performance and reflected in the marks awarded to them. Though the petitioners preferred an appeal, the same was rejected by Ext.P7. The uneven stage also twisted the feet of the performers which made it inconvenient and painful for them to perform. The petitioners contend that this adversely affected their performance and reflected in the marks awarded to them. Though the petitioners preferred an appeal, the same was rejected by Ext.P7. In Ext.P7, it is stated that the video was examined, the tabulation sheet as well as the report of the stage manager was considered and that there are no legal or technical grounds to be interfered with in appeal. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Ext.P7 has been passed without application of mind and that the report of the stage manager was generated prior to the filing of the appeal. W.P.C No.42833/2022 29. The petitioner was a participant in the Thiruvananthapuram Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 20222023 for the event 'Keralanadanam'. According to the petitioner, in spite of her excellent performance, she was given only 3rd place and when the final result was published in the website, she was given only 5th place. According to her, even as per the opinion of the audience, her performance deserved higher position. The appeal preferred by her was rejected by a non speaking order. W.P.C No.42832/2022 30. The petitioner was a participant in the Ernakulam Revenue District School Kalolsavam, 2022-2023 for the event 'Bharathanatyam'. According to the petitioner, Bharthanatyam competition was conducted on a stage which was constructed temporarily with wooden panels which were uneven and the petitioner was forced to perform only in the front portion of the stage, as she was afraid to go to the back portion of the stage as the wooden floor was loose. The petitioner states that due to the uneven surface of the stage, she lost balance twice which is evident from the video between 4 ½ minute to 5 ½ minutes. The petitioner states that, still she was confident and performed well. However, when the result was announced, she got only 2nd place. The petitioner submitted an appeal before the 4th respondent which was rejected by Ext. P2 stating that on examination of the video and the report of the stage manager, there are no legal or technical issues involved for interference in appeal. W.P.C No.42843/2022 31. The petitioner and 6 others were participants in the event “Yakshaganam” in the Kozhikode Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-2023. P2 stating that on examination of the video and the report of the stage manager, there are no legal or technical issues involved for interference in appeal. W.P.C No.42843/2022 31. The petitioner and 6 others were participants in the event “Yakshaganam” in the Kozhikode Revenue District School Kalolsavam 2022-2023. There were only two teams which participated in the competition and the petitioner's team was placed 2nd. According to the petitioner, the arrangements at the stage were inadequate and the rival team spoke in Malayalam, whereas as per the rules of the particular competition, the participants are to speak only in Kannada and hence they ought to have been disqualified. The appeal preferred by the petitioner was rejected stating that both teams performed at the same stage and on examination of the video it is evident that the complaint is not correct. The petitioner states that the judges did not properly evaluate the performance of the petitioner's team and the appeal committee did not consider the legal and technical aspects in the appeal. 32. As regards the interference by this Court in the award of marks in youth festival and the orders of the appellate authority, this Court in Rhomy Chandra Mohan v. General Convenor, Balakalotsavam and Yuvajanotsavam [ 1992 (1) KLJ 515 : 1992 KHC 211] 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. 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 impartial judges guided by relevant principles. If that be so, the fact that the petitioner did not get A grade I and was awarded only A grade II cannot be found fault with. As stated earlier, the assessment was made by judges competent for the purpose. It is not possible for this court to sit in appeal over such awards in a proceeding under Art.226 of the Constitution. It is not within the province of this court to re-assess the merits or demerits of candidates participating in competition made by competent judges appointed for the purpose. This court can interfere only when there is a plain illegality or some mala fides or some perversity or some other grossly vitiating circumstance in the assessment of merit. So far as that aspect is concerned, the petitioner has raised certain grounds in the original petition. According to him, the judges who assessed the merits of the Bharathanatyam candidates were substitutes appointed on the spot for the original judges, without any. enquiry regarding their qualifications for appointment as judges. It is also stated that Unnikrishnan, one of the judges was only a student studying Bharathanatyam and that Smt. Babita is from the same district. Thereby, it is stated, both of them are not qualified to be appointed as judges. It is also pointed out that no video photography of the competition was taken despite the mandate of the Rules for the purpose. 5. I do not think these factors vitiate the assessment of the merits. Thereby, it is stated, both of them are not qualified to be appointed as judges. It is also pointed out that no video photography of the competition was taken despite the mandate of the Rules for the purpose. 5. I do not think these factors vitiate the assessment of the merits. As stated earlier, the assessment of merits depends on an objective view taken by impartial judges appointed for the purpose. The petitioner or her parents did not at the time of the competition raise any objection to the eligibility or the qualifications of the judges who were appointed for assessing the merits of the Bharathanatyam candidates. Having sat on the fence and taken the chance of a decision with the judges who have been appointed, it is not open to the petitioner to contest the very eligibility of the judges when once the decision goes against her. This court will not, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Art.226 entertain such challenges, from a defeated candidate. It must also be mentioned that the judges have been appointed by the concerned authorities, who are interested in the proper conduct of the festival and the proper assessment of merit. There is no case anywhere in the Original petition that the respondents acted mala fide or with a hostile attitude towards the petitioner which made them select particular persons as judges. 6. The assessment of merit in such cases depends on the objective assessment made by judges appointed for the purpose. The fact that the petitioner was awarded only A grade II by the set of judges in question is not therefore open to challenge in a proceeding under Art.226. At the same time I do not find any reason for frustration on the part of the petitioner. After all, the difference between the first and second rank holders is only a matter of shade and not a matter of substance. If the true spirit of the festival, namely, healthy competition, is inculcated, there will be no cause for any grievances. It is not possible for this court to interfere with such assessment of merit in the absence of any other challenge to the same, I decline to entertain this Original Petition.” 33. Placing reliance on Rhomy Chandra Mohan (supra), this Court in Sweety v. State of Kerala [1994 KHC 216: 1994 (1) KLJ 47 ]] held as follows:- “4. It is not possible for this court to interfere with such assessment of merit in the absence of any other challenge to the same, I decline to entertain this Original Petition.” 33. Placing reliance on Rhomy Chandra Mohan (supra), this Court in Sweety v. State of Kerala [1994 KHC 216: 1994 (1) KLJ 47 ]] held as follows:- “4. I would prefer to deal with this question also from a different angle. Every college or school authorities have discretion to adopt any rule or procedure to regulate the curricular or extra-curricular activities of students in their institutions. The educational authorities have also power to frame rules or by laws for their own guidance in cases where State level or District level functions or festivals are organised to promote ex-tra-curricular activities among students. Under whatever name they are called, they are purely rules, intended to serve internal discipline among the students. The persons or authorities functioning under such rules shall have absolute freedom to control and check the affairs of the students participating in such extra curricular activities. Of course this freedom is subject to inherent and in built restrictions. In maintaining internal discipline among students who participate in such functions or festivals, the persons or authorities in charge may adopt different modes for the conduct of the affairs in an orderly manner. According to me such persons or authorities shall not be called upon to explain their conduct in the discharge of their functions In exercise of powers available to this court under Art.226 of the Constitution. Of course the position is different if there is violation of fundamental rights of the students attending such festivals or functions by the action of such persons or authorities. In such extreme cases this court will be justified if interference is made. I fail to see any of such questions in the present writ petitions. 5. While dealing with these cases it came to my notice that there are functionaries like 'Judges', 'Appeal Committee', etc. functioning under the rules framed for the conduct of competitions. Those bodies cannot be equated with ordinary judicial or quasi judicial bodies. As pointed out earlier, they are purely internal bodies of the educational institutions intended to subserve discipline among students in situations where disputes are likely to occur. functioning under the rules framed for the conduct of competitions. Those bodies cannot be equated with ordinary judicial or quasi judicial bodies. As pointed out earlier, they are purely internal bodies of the educational institutions intended to subserve discipline among students in situations where disputes are likely to occur. The exercise of their functions is completely confined to the field of Youth Festival where the discipline is absolutely necessary for the proper conduct of different competitions among the students. The decisions will have to be taken in certain cases on the spot and I fail to see how such decisions can be challenged in these proceedings. The assessment of performance of the participants are made by the 'judges'. Their wisdom and reason are final in such internal matters of educational institutions. However as an abundant caution the appeals are provided before the 'appeal committee' against the decision of the 'Judges'. The decision of the 'appeal' committee' shall be accepted as conclusive and final by the students and all others. That is purely a matter of observance of internal discipline. This court, according to me, will not be justified in interfering with such assessment of performance made by the appeal committee in their discretionary powers.” 34. A Division Bench of this Court in Manas Manohar v. Registrar, Kerala Lok Ayukta and Others [ 2022 (5) KHC 479 ] while dealing with the powers of the Upa Lok Ayukta, Human Rights Commission, Juvenile Justice Board, Civil Courts etc., to grant permission to the lost contestants to participate in the youth festivals at higher levels, observed as follows:- “7. We do not find any merit in the contentions. Incidentally, it is relevant to note that this Court has come across various similar orders being passed by the Upa Lok Ayukta, Human Rights Commission, Civil Courts and such other bodies, as a matter of course, granting permission to the lost contestants to participate in the youth festivals at higher levels and on the strength of such orders, they, who otherwise are not qualified for having failed to secure the 'first place' to have the eligibility to participate in the next level of participation secure undue benefit. The adverse circumstances resulted by virtue of such course have been highlighted by this Court on many an occasion, including as to the unsettling of the equilibrium in the time schedule fixed for conducting the festival. 8. The adverse circumstances resulted by virtue of such course have been highlighted by this Court on many an occasion, including as to the unsettling of the equilibrium in the time schedule fixed for conducting the festival. 8. The students in favour of whom such interim orders are passed may be persons, as in the instant case, the third prize winner or those who occupy much lower level. The student who got the second place or such other higher position as the case may be, if belongs to poor strata of the society, he will not be in a position to challenge the verdict passed at the feeder level and might be resting at home cursing his fate. In other words, the students who are awarded/rated with the 'second' or such other higher position are made to stay at home, the contestants at still lower level are being permitted to participate in the event. This will perpetuate injustice, compromising with the better talent. The interim orders being passed under such circumstances as a matter of course, are not at all in the best interest of the deserving lot, catering to the interested persons, who can afford to bear the cost of litigation, which is to be taken serious note of. 9. The interim orders passed by such authorities/quasi judicial bodies still virtually provide for increasing the number of participants in a given event or programme, where the number of permissible participants stands restricted by the organizers. It is to be noted, as part of illustration, the participants in a specific event may be 14' of 16', having secured the first position at the district level [representing the different districts/rev-enue/ educational districts] and the time schedule will be fixed in such a manner so as to complete the event to be followed by such other events to be conducted on the same stage, on the very same day. If the students occupying only lower position in the feeder level, are also permitted to participate as a matter of course [by Lok Ayukta or such other forum], there is a chance of increase in the total number of participants even beyond the logical limits. If the students occupying only lower position in the feeder level, are also permitted to participate as a matter of course [by Lok Ayukta or such other forum], there is a chance of increase in the total number of participants even beyond the logical limits. As a natural consequence, the time schedule will get unsettled and the event may go unending, even to be carried to the next day, adversely affecting the performance of other children who are waiting in the queue [who are otherwise qualified by virtue of their own merits, having secured the first position at feeder level] and also causing hardships to the members in the judging panel. This cycle will continue, resulting in undue delay in commencement and completion of the program in respect of the events scheduled on the same date, which has been deprecated by this Court on many an occasion.” 35. The observations and directions of the Division Bench in Manas Manohar (supra) have been reiterated by another Division Bench recently in Additional Director of Public Instructions and others. v. Anagha and others [ 2022 (5) KHC 473 ]. 36. The common grievances raised in these writ petitions are with regard to assessment of performance and evaluation of marks in the competition by the judges, poor arrangement of stage by the organizers, technical glitches and defective audio system, lack of experts in the panel of judges, extraneous considerations in the award of marks etc. 37. With regard to the assessment of performance of candidates and evaluation of marks, as held by this Court in Rhomy Chandra Mohan and Sweety (supra), this Court cannot sit in appeal over the award of marks by the panel of judges in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. With regard to complaints of poor stage arrangements including technical glitches, poor audio system, lack of space for performance, and whether these factors had affected the performance of the contestants, are again matters which cannot be considered in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Of course, these matters can be looked into by the appeal committees. The judges against whom allegations of extraneous considerations have been made are not parties to the writ petitions and the allegations are not supported by proof. In most cases, the contestants whose selection has been called in question are not made parties to the writ petitions. Of course, these matters can be looked into by the appeal committees. The judges against whom allegations of extraneous considerations have been made are not parties to the writ petitions and the allegations are not supported by proof. In most cases, the contestants whose selection has been called in question are not made parties to the writ petitions. The qualification of the judges in the panel and their expertise in the particular item of competition are also not matters which this Court can determine. An appeal has been provided by the Manual to consider the complaints regarding the results of the competitions and guidelines have been laid as to the nature of jurisdiction the appeal committees can exercise. As rightly held by this Court in Sweety (supra), though these appellate bodies cannot be equated with ordinary judicial or quasi judicial bodies, the decision of the appeal committees shall be accepted as conclusive and final. The competitions under the Kalolsavam are held under compressed time schedule as the cultural festivals shall not lead to loss of academic days. In between the Kalolsavams at the different levels, there may not be much time left for consideration of appeals by the appeal committees and they have to dispose of the appeals within five days or before the commencement of the Kalolsavam at the next level, which ever is earlier. In spite of prescription of deposit of appeal fee of Rs. 2000/-at the revenue level, lot of appeals are being filed against the award of marks in the competitions. The attractiveness of grace marks and cultural scholarships, misplaced anxieties of parents also lead to filing of appeals in most cases. If the decisions of the appeal committees are not treated as conclusive and final in cases other than where there is gross vitiating circumstances, the entire equilibrium in the time schedule fixed for conducting the Kalolsavam would be unsettled and defeated. Though rendered in the context of examining the powers of the Upa Lok Ayukta, Human Rights Commission, Juvenile Justice Board, Civil Courts etc., to grant permission to the lost contestants to participate in the youth festivals at higher levels, the observations of the Division Bench in Manas Manohar (supra) shall also bind this Court in passing interim or final orders, unless there is evidence of grossly vitiating circumstances in the evaluation and assessment of performance, for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. I do not find any such grossly vitiating circumstances in any of these cases warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the writ petitions fail. 38. Though I am constrained to dismiss these writ petitions on the ground of limitation of my jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, in view of the averments in some writ petitions that the minor contestants got injured by the stage being not properly laid, uneven surface, holes and presence of broken bangles, pins and nails on the floor of the stage, I direct the Principle Secretary to Government, General Education Department to ensure that no such mishaps happen in future at the Kalolsavams at any level and in case of such mishaps, the stage managers or/and other organizers responsible for such incidents shall be proceeded against appropriately. The officers responsible for arranging the stages shall be made aware of the penal consequences that they may entail in such cases, including proceedings under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The Committee for Manual reforms shall make necessary provisions in the Manual in this regard. 39. Before parting with the cases, I would like to observe that, the petitioners are not less talented than those who got the top score in the competitions. It is more important to participate than to win. Winning is not everything and the parents shall also equip their children to accept failure. Distorted or misplaced anxieties of parents may make the children slip into depression. Kalolsavams shall not be a platform for excess luxury or unhealthy competitions. Hope the parents of minor litigants before this Court may understand that there may be more talented students in the poor strata of the society who cannot afford costly costume or bear other expenses for the competition or the festival. As held by this Court in Rhomy Chandra Mohan (supra), if the true spirit of the festival, namely, healthy competition, is inculcated, there will be no cause for any grievances. The writ petitions are accordingly dismissed with the above observations.