Muralee Krishna, J.

1. The petitioner in W.P.(C)No.6065 of 2026 filed this writ appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, challenging the judgment dated 17.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.

2. The appellant-petitioner is a 3rd year B.A. Degree (English Literature and Communication Studies) student in the 5th respondent College affiliated to the 2nd respondent Mahatma Gandhi University (M.G. University for short). As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the appellant is aggrieved by her non- selection by the College to participate in the events, Bharathanatyam, Kuchipudi and Folk dance in the M.G. University Intercollegiate Youth Festival 2026, scheduled to be held from 27.02.2026 to 05.03.2026.

3. The appellant pleads that she participated in the dance events in Category of Kerala Natanam, Nangyar Koothu, Bharatha Natyam, Kuchippudi and Folk Dance in different stages and obtained merit certificates from the CBSE level and at the university level. The appellant had talent and interest in the above category of dance performance and continued her dance practice under the Natyakala and also now under the guidance of Kalakshethra Amalnath, who was once selected as Kala Prathibha in the M.G. University. The 5th and 6th respondents selected the appellant to participate in the Youth festival for the items of Kerala Natanam and Nangyar koothu alone and not selected the appellant to participate in the items Bharatanatyam, Kuchipudi and Folk Dance and denied the chance of the appellant’s right to participate in the above items and it will adversely affect the inclusion of the name of the appellant in the title of Kala Thilakam. Only if a candidate participates in 5 items, he or she will be considered for the title of Kala Thilakam. So the action of the respondents is clear discrimination and against natural justice and violation of the fundamental rights of the Constitution. The respondents purposefully did not consider the representation submitted by the appellant to participate individually to perform the Kuchipudi, Folk Dance and Bharathanatyam in the M.G. University Intercollegiate Youth Festival (Inamayi) 2026. The representation is still pending before the respondents. With these pleadings, the appellant filed the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:

                  “(i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to Call for the entire records which leading to the case and to allow the petitioner to participate in the items of Bharathanatyam, Kuchipudi and Folk Dance in the Mahatma Gandhi University Intercollegiate Youth Festival (Inamayi) 2026 which will be held at Thiruvalla on 27th February till March 5th 2026.

                  ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to participate the petitioner individually in the items of Bharathanatyam, Kuchipudi and Folk Dance in the Mahatma Gandhi University Intercollegiate Youth Festival (Inamayi) 2026 which will be held at Thiruvalla on 27th February till March 5th 2026”.

4. On 17.02.2026, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Paragraphs 4, 5 and the subsequent paragraphs of that judgment read thus:

                  “4. Participation in the Intercollegiate University Youth Festival is based on a selection carried out in each event. Only the first-prize winners at the college level are permitted to participate in the intercollegiate competition. Petitioner admittedly could not secure first prize at the college level for Bharatha Natyam, Kuchipudi and Folk Dance. Though she claims to have won several prizes in the previous years, as evident from Exts.P1 to P12, except for Exts.P2, P7 and P10 all other certificates relate to second prize or third prize. Even in respect of the three certificates, where she secured the first prize those relate to Youth Festivals conducted by the CBSE in the year 2019.

                  5. Merely because the participant had secured first prize in some of the previous years or in the distant past, those success cannot entitle that person to be selected in the future years. Selection for participation in the Youth Festival is based on the relative merit of assessment of the performance in that event on that day. The prior credentials cannot enable a candidate to be selected or claim a right to participate in the events in the future.

                  In view of the above, I find no merit in the claim for the petitioner to be given an opportunity to participate in the Inter Collegiate Youth Festival for the year 2026.

                  Hence, this writ petition is dismissed”.

5. Being aggrieved by the non-granting of reliefs sought in the writ petition, the appellant-petitioner has filed the present writ appeal. Over and above the contentions raised in the writ petition, the appellant further contended in the writ appeal that no proper college-level competition was conducted in accordance with the provisions of M.G. University Intercollegiate Youth Festival Manual 2026 (the ‘Manual’ for short) and the selection for the Intercollegiate Youth Festival was in a random manner. The three items for which the appellant was not selected from the College level were not even included in the arts festival from which selection ought to have been made as per the Manual. The various Clauses under Chapter VII of the Manual are highlighted in the writ appeal claiming that the mandates regarding the college-level competition for selection of students to the University Inter Collegiate Youth Festival were not followed by the College.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the learned Standing Counsel for M.G. University for respondents 2 to 4, and the learned Government Pleader.

7. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant, as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the M.G. University, invited our attention to various Clauses in the Manual. When the learned counsel for the appellant contended that Clauses 5, 6 and 7 under Chapter VII of the Manual was not followed by the College and therefore by virtue of Clause 5 under Chapter II of the Manual, this Court may direct the respondents to permit the appellant to participate in the events based on her merits in those items relying on Exts.P1 to P12 certificates of merits produced by her, the learned Standing Counsel for M.G. University would submit that the pleadings supporting the claim of non-conducting of College level competition as per the Manual is absent in the writ petition. It is also the argument of the learned Standing Counsel that the appellant has no case that she made any complaint or appeal at the college level as provided under Clause 9 under Chapter VII of the Manual.

8. While appreciating the arguments addressed at the Bar, in the light of the pleadings in the writ petition, it is appropriate to extract some of the relevant Clauses under Chapter II and Chapter VII of the Manual. Clauses 4 and 5 under Chapter II of the Manual read thus:

                  “4. Participation Rules and Restrictions

                  4.1. Only one participant or one team from a college shall be permitted to participate in a particular event of the Youth Festival.

                  4.2. Only participants securing First Position in the Institution-level Arts festival shall be eligible to participate at the University level.

                  4.3. A participant may take part in a maximum of six (6) individual events out of 71 individual events.

                  4.4. Each institution shall be represented by one team per group event and may participate in a maximum of seven (7) group events out of the total twenty-one (20) group events except for the event One Act play (Drama).

                  5. Participation Based on Court orders

                  5.1. In cases where students obtain temporary registration on the basis of Hon’ble court orders and participate in competitions:

                  . If such participants secure First, Second or Third positions, the corresponding points shall not be awarded to the colleges represented by them.

                  . The marks obtained by such participants shall not be considered for conferring the titles Kala Prathibha, Kala Thilakam, and Prathibha Thilakam.

                  5.2. However, such participants shall be eligible for Grace Marks, as applicable, as per university rules.

                  5.3. The marks obtained by participants who secure positions on the basis of court orders shall be considered for grading purposes only, subject to the above restrictions”.

9. Similarly, Clauses 5, 6, 7 and 9 under Chapter VII of the Manual read thus;

                  “5. Conduct of College Level Competitions

                  5.1. College-Level competitions shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the rules, items, participation limits, and performance guidelines prescribed for University-Level competitions.

                  5.2. College-Level competitions shall be completed at least fifteen (15) days prior to the commencement of the University Inter Collegiate Youth Festival.

                  5.3. Proper records including score sheets, judges' remarks, attendance sheets, and results shall be maintained by the college.

                  6. Selection and Eligibility of Participants

                  6.1. Only students securing First Place in individual events at the College-Level competitions shall be eligible to participate in the University Inter Collegiate Youth Festival.

                  6.2 Each student shall be permitted to participate in a maximum of six (6) individual events only.

                  6.3 The total number of events for the Youth Festival shall be ninety- one (91).

                  6.4 Group Events

                  a) Each college shall submit only one team per group event.

                  b) Except One Act Play (Drama), a college may participate in a maximum of seven (7) out of twenty (20) group events.

                  c) The number of participants prescribed for each group event shall be strictly followed.

                  7. Submission of Participant Details

                  7.1. A list of participants who secured eligibility, duly signed by the Principal and the Arts Club Secretary, shall be submitted to the Directorate of Students' Welfare / Mahatma Gandhi University Students' Union on or before the notified date.

                  7.2. The submission shall include:

                  a) Name of the participant (in block letters)

                  b) Class and department

                  c) Address

                  d) Mobile number and Email ID

                  e) Registration details

                  f) Recent passport-size photograph

                  7.3 In the case of group items, the names and details of all participants shall be included.

                  xxx xxx xxx xxx

                  9. Complaints and Appeals at College Level

                  9.1. The College Level Steering-Cum-Appellate Committee shall function as the Appellate Body for College-Level competitions.

                  9.2. Any complaint regarding: a) Selection of candidates,

                  b) Conduct of competitions, or

                  c) Procedural irregularities

                  shall be submitted in writing to the College Level Steering- Cum-Appellate Committee within the time prescribed by the college.

                  9.3. The decision of the College Level Steering-Cum- Appellate Committee shall be final and binding”.

10. The reading of the above provisions in the Manual, as extracted above, would make it clear that the college-level competitions shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the Rules, items, participation limits, and performance guidelines prescribed for University-level competitions and only the first prize winners in the individual events at the college level competitions shall be eligible to participate in the University Intercollegiate Youth Festival. Though the appellant says that no college-level competitions were conducted in the 5th respondent College as stipulated in the Manual, the pleadings to that effect are conspicuously absent in the writ petition. The averment in the writ petition is that respondents 5 and 6 purposefully did not consider the eligibility of the appellant, and Exts.P1 to P12 grade certificates. As per the pleadings in the writ petition, the action of those respondents is clear discrimination. The pleadings relying on various clauses of the Manual incorporated in the appeal are not pleaded in the writ petition.

11. As far as the importance of the pleadings in the writ petition is concerned, in Bharat Singh v. State of Haryana [1988 (4) SCC 534] the Apex Court held that, when a point which is ostensibly a point of law is required to be substantiated by facts, the party raising the point, if he is the writ petitioner, must plead and prove such facts by evidence which must appear from the writ petition and if he is the respondent, from the counter affidavit. If the facts are not pleaded or the evidence in support of such facts is not annexed to the writ petition or to the counter affidavit, as the case may be, the Court will not entertain the point. The Apex Court held further that there is a distinction between a pleading under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and a writ petition or a counter affidavit. While in a pleading, i.e., a plaint or a written statement, the facts and not evidence are required to be pleaded, in a writ petition or in the counter affidavit not only the facts but also the evidence in proof of such facts have to be pleaded and annexed to it.

12. In Narmada Bachao Andolan v. State of Madhya Pradesh [2011 (7) SCC 639] a Three - Judge Bench of the Apex Court held that, it is a settled proposition of law that a party has to plead its case and produce/adduce sufficient evidence to substantiate the averments made in the petition and in case the pleadings are not complete the Court is under no obligation to entertain the pleas. Pleadings and particulars are required to enable the court to decide the rights of the parties in the trial. Thus, the pleadings are more to help the court in narrowing the controversy involved and to inform the parties concerned to the question(s) in issue, so that the parties may adduce appropriate evidence on the said issue. It is a settled legal proposition that, as a rule, relief not founded on the pleadings should not be granted. Therefore, a decision of a case cannot be based on grounds outside the pleadings of the parties. The object and purpose of pleadings and issues is to ensure that the litigants come to trial with all issues clearly defined and to prevent cases being expanded or grounds being shifted during trial. If any factual or legal issue, despite having merit, has not been raised by the parties, the court should not decide the same as the opposite counsel does not have a fair opportunity to answer the line of reasoning adopted in that regard. Such a judgment may be violative of the principles of natural justice.

13. As mentioned above, though the appellant raised various contentions regarding non-compliance of the provisions in the Manual while selecting participants for the University Intercollegiate Youth Festival, the pleading to that effect is conspicuously absent in the writ petition. It is trite that the appellant cannot widen the scope of the writ petition by making additional pleadings in the writ appeal.

14. It is also pertinent to note in the present case that the appellant has not preferred any complaint or appeal at the college level against the non-conducting of the selection process by conducting college-level competitions, as claimed by her, except Ext.P13 representation to the Principal of the College. If no such selection process was conducted at the college level as per the Manual, then how the appellant was selected for two items for participating in the University Intercollegiate Youth Festival is also not clearly pleaded in the writ petition.

15. At this moment, it is appropriate to refer the observations of a learned Single Judge of this Court in Sweety v. State of Kerala [1994 (1) KLT SN 4] wherein, while considering a writ petition filed by some of the students seeking direction to permit them to participate in the State School Youth Festival for the year 1992 - 1993, it was held thus:

                  “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 extra - 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 Article 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. 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”.

16. Though Clause 5 under Chapter II of the Manual speaks about Court orders, the learned Standing Counsel for the M.G. University submitted that such a Clause is incorporated in the Manual since, in previous years, several participants obtained court orders, permitting them to participate in the university-level competitions and to streamline the competitions, such a clause is incorporated in the Manual. Therefore, we find no merit in the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that, on the strength of Clause 5 under Chapter II of the Manual, the appellant is entitled to get an order from this Court permitting her to participate in the three items of the competitions in the University Intercollegiate Youth Festival, mentioned in the writ petition. This Court cannot take the role of the experts in the field to assess the competence of the appellant to participate in the Intercollegiate Youth Festival by relying on Exts.P1 to P12 certificates, secured by the appellant in the competitions conducted in the previous years, as well as in the competitions conducted by the CBSE.

                  Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and the submissions made at the Bar, we find no ground to hold the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge as perverse or patently illegal which warrants interference by exercising appellate jurisdiction.

                  In the result, the writ appeal stands dismissed.