Madras High Court: In a writ petition under the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) bye-laws, a Single Judge Bench of S.M. Subramaniam Chakravarthy, J., held that a student who had studied Mathematics in Class XI and part of Class XII, but later replaced it with Physical Education, could still be permitted to appear for the Mathematics examination as an additional subject. The Court noted that the petitioner had sought permission to correct the mistake, but CBSE rejected the application citing procedural rules. The Court found that the rejection was contrary to settled principles, and set aside order dated 8 January 2026, and directed the Regional Director of CBSE to verify the records and permit the student to appear for the supplementary Mathematics examination, thereby disposing of the writ petition.
The Court remarked that education equals learning throughout the world, but in this part of the world, education equals admission to a medical seat or engineering seat. The Court emphasised that parents make children run the terrible rat race, and in the madness, all kinds of subject changes occur, as in this case, where lighter subjects were chosen.
Background
The petitioner had filed an application before CBSE seeking permission to write the Mathematics examination as an additional subject, contending that she had studied Mathematics during Class XI and part of Class XII. CBSE rejected the application, reasoning that its bye-laws permit an additional subject only if studied for two academic years beginning from Class XI.
The petitioner argued that the student had genuinely studied Mathematics and should be allowed to correct the mistake.
However, the State and CBSE opposed the plea, relying on procedural rules and the rejection order dated 8 January 2026.
Analysis and Decision
The Court observed that normally, students of CBSE are mandated to study five subjects, including English as one of the language subjects. The Court noted that apart from the mandatory five subjects, students of CBSE can study one additional subject as the sixth subject, and certain facilities have been granted in respect thereof to appear as a private candidate.
The Court emphasised that the extreme precarious situation of the student must be taken into account, as it was stated that due to external pressure, the subject was changed at the last minute. The Court highlighted that the petitioner had studied Mathematics, and if this fact is taken into account, incorrect information was fed to the CBSE.
The Court remarked that education equals learning throughout the world, but in this part of the world, education equals admission to a medical seat or engineering seat. The Court emphasised that parents make children run the terrible rat race, and in the madness, all kinds of subject changes occur, as in this case, where lighter subjects were chosen. It was noted that in High School, even the mother tongue is sacrificed to take other easier subjects and these practices are adopted by parents, thinking that if the child studies three subjects alone, they will come out with flying colours in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) examination, which ultimately was not the case here, and now the child finds herself at the crossroads.
The Court observed that the child studied Mathematics throughout Class XI and up to some time in Class XII, and therefore, the law should lean in favour of correcting procedures towards truth. The Court emphasised that as an extraordinary situation has arisen, the student should be permitted by the CBSE to take up the supplementary examination for the Mathematics subject.
Accordingly, the Court directed that if any requisite form and fees are to be collected from the student, they shall be taken in accordance with law. The Court also ordered that the petitioner, along with the minor student, must appear before the Regional Director, CBSE with the web copy of the order and proof of having studied Mathematics in Class XI and for some period in Class XII, including notebooks, homework, school certificates, and other evaluations.
The Court observed that if the Regional Director, CBSE is satisfied that the student studied Mathematics for a considerable period, then she should be granted the opportunity to take Mathematics as an additional subject, be permitted to write the supplementary examination, and have her results declared with a mark sheet issued.
Ultimately, the Court clarified that these directions were issued in the peculiar facts of the case, with no order as to costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.
[B. Shajimon v. Union of India, W.P. No. 3376 of 2026, decided on 25-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: A. Mohamed Ismail
For the Respondents: D. Baskar, Central Government Standing Counsel, T. Sri Krishna Bhagavat