E S CHANDRASEKARAN Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) he petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to permit him to appear before the Music Audition Board (second chance) directly for getting himself upgraded from B Grade in Mirudhangam, an accompanying instrument without insisting him to appear again before the Local Audition Committee.

(2.) Heard Mr.M.V.Venkataseshan, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and Ms.S.Rajalakshmi, for Mr.M.T.Arunan, Additional Central Government Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The writ petitioner, a Mirudhangam Artist with rich experience applied for Audition before the second respondent for selection as a Casual Artist in All India Radio. As the local Committee satisfied with the performance by communication dated 28.12.1992 informed the petitioner that he has been recommended for audition by the Music Audition Board. The petitioner was called upon to appear before the Music Audition Board. The petitioner claims that he has performed well on 12.1.1993 before the said Board. As the performance was satisfactory, the petitioner was placed in B-Category for a period of five years. The petitioner has also been advised to upgrade himself through re-audition within a period of five years. The petitioner was given three contracts every year for playing Mirudhangam. The petitioner who has to upgrade himself within a period of five years applied for upgradation during March, 1997 and he was called upon to appear for recording on 16.5.1997. The second respondent by a communication dated 7.1.1998 intimated that his performance being not satisfactory, upgradation applied for has been rejected and he was asked to improve himself to appear. As the period of five years lapsed the petitioner was not given engagement. On 27.12.1998 the petitioner approached the second respondent for re-audition (second chance) for getting upgradation from B Grade. The petitioner came to know that his name has been removed from the categories and that he is not eligible to appear for re audition. The petitioner has made representation on 5.1.199 requesting the respondent to permit him to appear ;for reaudition (second chance). However, by the impugned communication it was informed that as the petitioner has failed to upgrade himself as per the rules his name has been weeded out from the list of casual music artists on the expiry of the 5 yea5rs period and that he should apply before the Local Audition committee once again by remitting the prescribed fee. At this stage the petitioner has come before this court seeking for the relief of mandamus as the refusal to permit the petitioner for re audition before the Music Audition Board (Second chance) is illegal, arbitrary and it is without any reason or rhyme. Hence the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of mandamus.