Delhi High Court: The present writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus directing Central Board of Secondary Education (‘CBSE’) to correct Petitioner 2’s internal assessment marks in Social Studies for Class X in the academic year 2019-2020 from 18 to 20. C. Hari Shankar, J.*, opined that the Circulars dated 08-11-2019 and 30-01-2020 of CBSE were clear and categorical and they did not allow any change in the internal assessment marks for a student as uploaded by the school on CBSE’s website. The Court dismissed the writ petition and held that as Circulars issued by CBSE were not under challenge and as CBSE’s decision was in sync with the Circulars, no sustainable grievance existed in the present writ petition.
Background
Petitioner 2 was a student at the Indian School (‘the school’) at Muscat, Oman, affiliated to CBSE. She entered Class X in 2019 and passed out of Class X in 2020. Petitioner 2’s contention was that she was a student, who had been maxing in her papers throughout. Petitioner 1, Nilakantha Das was the father of Petitioner 2.
On 15-07-2020, CBSE announced the final examination results of Class X and on perusing the results, petitioners noticed that Petitioner 2 was awarded only 18 marks out of 20 in internal assessment in the Social Studies paper though she scored 20 out of 20 in all other subjects. This had provoked petitioners to contact the school, claiming that Petitioner 2 ought to have been awarded 20 on 20 in internal assessment for her Social Studies paper as she had been awarded 20 marks out of 20 in internal assessment for all other subjects.
Thereafter, the school acknowledged its mistake and on 16-07-2020 itself, the school addressed a communication to CBSE, stating that it had erroneously uploaded the internal assessment marks of seven students, including Petitioner 2, as 18 out of 20 instead of 20 out of 20. Therefore, the school requested CBSE to carry out the necessary corrections at its end. On 31-08-2020, CBSE responded to the school stating that it was not possible to accede to the request to change the internal assessment marks of the seven candidates, in respect of whom the school claimed to have committed an error, in view of Circular No. F.No. CBSE/AS(COORD)/IA/X/2020 dated 30-01-2020.
Petitioners filed an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (‘RTI Act’) and thereafter CBSE, in its response dated 10-11-2020 acknowledged that the actual internal assessment marks of Petitioner 2 in Social Studies were 20 and not 18. As CBSE was unwilling to accede to the request either of the school or of petitioners, to revise the internal assessment marks awarded to Petitioner 2 in the Social Studies stream from 18 to 20, she approached this Court through her father, by means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Analysis, Law, and Decision
The Court opined that the Circulars dated 08-11-2019 and 30-01-2020 of CBSE were clear and categorical and they did not allow any change in the internal assessment marks for a student as uploaded by the school on CBSE’s website. The Court further opined that the schools had been advised to be careful while uploading the marks, as once the marks were uploaded, no correction would be allowed.
The Court noted that the Circular dated 08-11-2019 specifically stipulated, in the matter of the marks relating to internal assessment in Classes X and XII, that no request from the school stating that wrong marks had been uploaded, would be entertained once the marks already stood uploaded on CBSE’s website and the marks once uploaded would be treated as final for preparing CBSE’s result.
The Court opined that once the school uploaded the internal assessment marks of a student on CBSE’s website, it could not seek any correction in that regard, even if there was an error while uploading the marks. The Court stated that as Circulars of CBSE were not challenged, the present petition was devoid of any cause of action. The Court further stated that what was being sought was a revision of the marks which were communicated by the school to the CBSE and which, accordingly, found place in the final Exam results declared by the CBSE and it was not a case in which the error had taken place at the end of CBSE because if that had been the position, it might still have been possible to contend that petitioners had a legitimate grievance.
The Court stated that CBSE Circulars specifically proscribe any such revision. The Court opined that the proscription was eminently in the public interest. Schools in India, as well as abroad, were affiliated to CBSE. Utter chaos would result if schools were permitted to commit errors while uploading students’ marks on CBSE’s website and thereafter, call upon CBSE to correct the marks awarded at their end. The CBSE would also not be in a position to blindly accept such requests, and would, if this practice were to be allowed, conduct independent verifications in each such case to ascertain the actual marks which the candidate had been awarded.
The Court dismissed the writ petition and held that as Circulars issued by CBSE were not under challenge and as CBSE’s decision was in sync with the Circulars, no sustainable grievance existed in the present writ petition.
[Nilkanth Das v. CBSE, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 84, decided on 05-01-2024]
*Judgment authored by: Justice C. Hari Shankar
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: N.K. Sahoo, Advocate
For the Respondents: Ashok Kumar, Advocate
Buy Constitution of India HERE
