Gauhati High Court
WA/17/2022 on 6 May, 2022
GAHC010178692021
Judgment reserved on :9th March, 2022
Judgment delivered on : 06.05.2022.
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
WRIT APPEAL NO.354 OF 2021
(ARISING OUT OF WP(C)/4400/2021)
1. Bistirna Hazarika, age 19 years, D/O-Lokendra
Hazarika. Village-Khetri, Bidyanagar, P.O-
Khetri, District-Kamrup(M), Pin-782403.
2. Puja Kalita, age 19 years, D/O-Sri Purnanda
Kalita. Village-Tihu Ward No.2, P.O and P.S-
Tihu District-Nalbari, Assam, Pin-781371.
3. Dhrubjyoti Dihingia, age 19 years, S/O-Dulu
Dihingia. R/O Paschim Krishna Kanta
Handique Nagar Kahilipara, Guwahati-781019
District-Kamrup (M).
4. Dipankar Baro, age 19 years, S/O-Naren
Chandra Baro. Vilalge-Tulshibari District-
Kamrup, Assam, Pin-781376.
5. Jerifa Aktar Khanam, age 19 years, D/O-Jul
Hussain Ahmed. R/O-Barpeta Road. P.S-
Barpeta Road District-Barpeta, Assam.
6. Harshajit Das, age 19 years, S/O-Matindra
Das, resident of Village-Pipla, P.O-Nityananda
District-Barpeta, Assam-781329.
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
Page 1 of 14
7. Neha Talukdar, age 19 years, D/O- Bhaben
Talukdar. R/O-House No.10 Bishnupath, R.G.
Baruah Road. P.O Zoo Road. District-Kamrup
(M) Guwahati-781024.
8. Kitartha Sarma, age 19 years, S/O- Naren
Chandra Sarma, resident of Luit Nagar,
Noonmati Guwahati-781020 District-Kamrup
(M).
9. Dibajyoti Sarma, age 19 eyars S/O-Kamal
Sarma, resident of village-Gourangtri Pt-II,
P.O-Futkabari, District-Dhubri (Assam).
10. Akash Das, age 19 eyars. S/O-Chabirnjan
Das, resident of village-Puthimari. P.O-
Odalguri, District-Barpeta. Pin-781325.
11. Poulami Basumatary, age 19 years , D/O-
Bhabiram Basumatary, R/O- Rangapara Town
Ward No.4, Namoni Gaon District-Sonitpur.
12. Jahir Khan, s/o-Jakir Hussain, village and
P.O Kazigaon, District-Kokrajhar (B.T.R)
Assam, Pin-783339.
........Appellants
-Versus-
1. The State of Assam,
Represented by the Secretary to the Government
of Assam, Secondary Education Department,
Dispur, Guwahati-6.
2. The Chairman, Assam Higher Secondary
Education Council, Bhuban Bhuyan Path, Railway
Colony, Bamunimaidam, Guwahati-781021.
........Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
WRIT APPEAL NO.17 OF 2022
(ARISING OUT OF WP(C)/4405/2021)
1. Manash Pratim Das, age 19 years S/o Prafulla
Das, R/o Bamunimaidam, Guwahati, P.O.
Bamunimaidam, Dist Kamrup(M) Assam, PIN
-- 781021.
2. Chinmoy Pathak, age 19 years S/o Bhupendra
Kr. Pathak R/o House No. 54, Shankar Nagar,
P.O. Noonmati, Dist: Kamrup(M), Guwahati,
Assam, PIN 781020.
3. Imran Nazir Hassan, age 19 years,S/o Abdul
Gofur, R/o Vill:Kachumara, P.O.:Kachu mara,
Dist: Barpeta, Assam, PIN-781127.
4. Hridol Ramchiary, age 19 years, S/o Atul
Ramchiary, R/o Vill: Lechera, P.O.: Kardaiguri,
Dist: Barpeta, Assam, PIN -- 781325.
5. Dipa Das, age 19 years, D/o Sukumar Das,
R/o Morigaon, P.O.: Morigaon, Dist Morigaon,
Assam, PIN-782411.
6. Aminur Islam, age 19 years, S/o Rafikul Islam,
R/o Vill: Sidhabari, P.O.:Bahati, Dist:Goalpara,
Assam, PIN-783125.
7. Husniara Begum, age 19 years,D/o Hafiz Md.
Sader Ali Vill: Gumaijhar, P.Q.: Simlabari, Dist:
Goalpara, Assam, PIN -783330.
8. Pritismita Sarma, age 19 years, D/o Achyut
Chandra Sarma, Madhavdev Nagar, Maligaon,
P.S. Jalukbari, Guwahati, Dist-Kamrup(M),
Assam, PIN-781011.
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
9. Prastuti Malakar, age 19 years, D/o Rabin
Malakar, R/o Pakahamela, Hajo Dist -Kamrup,
Assam, PIN-781102.
10. Bikash Thakuria, age 19 years S/o Nakul Ch.
Thakuria,R/o Village and P.O.: Adabari, Dist :
Nalbari, Assam, PIN-781126.
11. Nilakhi Mali, age 19 years, D/o Bhabesh
Chandra Mali, R/o Jayanta Nagar, Noonmati,
Dist-Kamrup (M),Guwahati, PIN -781020,
Assam.
12. Hrishikesh Patowary, age 19 years, S/o
Kulenda Patowary, R/O Panjabari Mangolane
Path, P.O. Panjabari, Guwahati-781037
District-Kamrup (M), Assam.
........Appellants
-Versus-
1. The State of Assam,
Represented by the Secretary to the Government
of Assam, Secondary Education Department,
Dispur, Guwahati-6.
2. The Chairman, Assam Higher Secondary
Education Council, Bhuban Bhuyan Path, Railway
Colony, Bamunimaidam, Guwahati-781021.
........Respondents
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
-BEFORE-
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SUDHANSHU DHULIA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
Advocate for the appellants : Mr. K.N. Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by
Ms. R. Pr. Kakati.
Advocate for the respondents : Ms. P. Chakraborty, standing counsel, Education
(Secondary) Department and Mr. T.C. Chutia,
standing counsel, AHSEC.
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
(Soumitra Saikia, J)
1. The petitioners are students, who had appeared in the H.S.
Final examination in the year 2020 conducted by the Assam
Higher Secondary Education Council. Although they had cleared
the H.S. Final examination 2020 but they were not satisfied with
the marks they had secured in the said examination. Aspiring to
obtain better marks in the respective subjects so as to make them
eligible for higher studies in various institutions in the country,
they had opted to appear for "Betterment examination" for the
year 2021 conducted by the Assam Higher Secondary Education
Council. But, because of the COVID-19 pandemic situation which
was prevailing in the country including the State at the relevant
point in time, the department of Education, Government of Assam
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
decided not to hold the Higher Secondary Final Examination for
the year 2021. Instead a notification dated 01.07.2021 was issued
by the department laying down the manner in which marks are to
be allotted to the students under various categories who were
scheduled to appear in the Higher Secondary Final examination,
2021. The petitioners were aggrieved by the process for allotment
of marks as notified in the notification dated 01.07.2021. They
represented before the department before the Chairman, Assam
Higher Secondary Counsel on 10.07.2021 requesting for adoption
of justified marking assessment process so that petitioners are
able to obtain better marks in the subjects which they had opted
for in the "Betterment examination". Their representation
remained unattended and the results of the H.S. Final
examination, 2021 were declared on 31.07.2021. According to the
petitioners because of the faulty evaluation process and allotment
of marks, the petitioners got very few marks in the subject in
which they had appeared for in the "Better Examination". The
petitioners, therefore, approached this Court by filing the instant
writ petition. By the impugned Order dated 09.09.2021, the writ
petition was disposed of without granting the relief prayed for.
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
2. Being aggrieved the present appeal has been filed by the
petitioners assailing the order dated 09.09.2021 passed by the
learned Single Judge in WP(C)/4400/2021 and WP(C)/4405/2021.
3. The learned Senior counsel, Mr. K. N. Choudhury assisted by
Ms. R. Pr. Kakati urged before this Court that the entire process
adopted by the Assam High Secondary Education Council as
notified by the notification dated 01.07.2021, is faulty and has not
treated the appellants at par with the other examinees appearing
under other categories although they were similarly situated,
being not able to appear in the H.S. Final examination, 2021 due
to COVID-19 situation. The learned senior counsel urged that the
appellants ought to have been evaluated at par with the failed /
repeat category students. It is urged that the appellants did not
fail in the earlier examination but have only sought to improve
their marks in certain subjects. However, because of different
methods of evaluation adopted by the H.S Council as notified vide
the guideline dated 01.07.2021, the hopes and aspirations of the
appellants that they would be able to improve upon the marks
have been totally lost. Such adoption of different methods of
evaluation for students who are similarly placed are discriminately
and arbitrary. The learned senior counsel urged that the special
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
examination for 2021 although announced was not held as per
schedule and this had left the student community more
particularly the appellants in quandary. Had the appellants
undertaken the special examination, then also the declaration of
results would have taken sometime and as a consequence thereof
the petitioners would have lost their opportunity of getting
admitted in an institution of their choice. The learned senior
counsel urged that for no fault of theirs, the appellants are not
been treated at par with their peers because of the peculiar
manner of allocation of marks. Such a disadvantage have been
caused to the appellants as compared to their peers although
they did not fail in any of the subjects but are merely seeking to
enhance the marks which they had obtained earlier. The learned
senior counsel submits that this aspect of the matter was not
taken into consideration by the learned Single Judge and the writ
petition was disposed of on the submissions made by the counsel
for the department that if the candidates (the appellants herein)
who are intending to appear for the betterment in respect of the
examination held in the year 2020, can also appear in the special
examination, if the petitioners submit their application within a
period of 3 (three) days, the council will accept the same and
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
issue Admit Cards permitting the petitioners to appear in the
special examination for the purpose of the betterment of the
respective subjects.
4. The petitioners were permitted to furnish their application
forms in physical form if they were unable to submit through the
On-Line mode. Writ petition was accordingly disposed of. The
learned senior counsel strongly urged that the core issue namely
the discrimination being meted out to the appellants was not even
decided by the learned Single Judge. He, therefore, submits that
the impugned order is bad in law and he same should be
interfered with, set aside and quashed.
5. Mr. T. C. Chutia, learned standing counsel appearing for the
Higher Secondary Council submits that there is no infirmity in the
order impugned in as much as the guidelines had been issued by
the counsel on the basis of the report of the alternative method
committee which had deliberated upon the evaluation of marks
for H.S. Final examination, 2021. The Committee's report had also
been approved by the Government. The learned Standing counsel
submits that it is not mandatory for the appellants to appear for
betterment examination. It is an option offered and which had
been availed of by the appellants. They also had the option to
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
appear for the special High Secondary Examination, 2021 which
however they did not avail of. The appellants were given the
opportunity to apply and submit their forms for the special
examination in terms of the order passed by the learned Single
Judge, however, they have failed to appear. Therefore, there is
no infirmity in the order passed by the learned single judge and in
the guidelines.
6. It is further submitted that the guidelines are prepared on
the basis of the report of the committee which was duly approved
by the Government. There is no challenge to the said guidelines
by the petitioners.
7. We have heard the learned counsels for the parties. We
have also perused the pleadings on record as well as the
Judgment impugned in the present writ appeal. In the said
notification dated 01.07.2021 the allocation of marks for students
seeking "Betterment examination" and those for unsuccessful
students are extracted as under:-
"(a.i) Betterment (Maximum in four subjects):
Enhancement of marks be done on the basis of marks
obtained in the last HS Final Examination and marks be
allotted as shown below...
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
10% for Third Division
7% for Second Division
5% for First Division
(b) For repeat (unsuccessful candidate):
*50 marks be calculated from 50% marks secured by
the students in the best three subjects in the HSLC or
equivalent examination.
*40% marks (Maximum) be calculated from the First
Year Annual examination conducted by the
Institutions/AHSEC.
*10 marks be allotted on the basis of consideration of
the marks obtained by the students out of 90 (Ninety) in
earlier 2 (Two) components and 10% of marks out of 90
be allotted accordingly".
8. The appellants are aggrieved that the allocation of marks
for unsuccessful candidates provides an opportunity to those
candidates to score better marks. However, so far as the
appellants are concerned, the evaluation process prescribed in the
notification will not enable them to score better marks. This
according to the appellant is arbitrary and discriminatory in as
much as this is an unjust classification amongst to similarly
situated student groups.
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
9. The Notification dated 01.07.2021 reveals that this system
of evaluation was decided by the Alternative Method Committee
(AMC). The report of the said committee is stated to have been
approved by the Government. That apart as per Clause-7 of the
said notification, the students who are dissatisfied with the
assessment done by the council for the year 2021 is also provided
for an option for appearing in a special examination to be
conducted by the Council whenever the situation become
conducive for holding the examination. The performance of the
students in that examination will be assessed as per existing
norms of the Council.
10. It is pleaded by the appellants that they did not opt for the
special examination because of the uncertainty involved towards
the date of examination. The learned Single Judge while disposing
of the writ petition, in terms of the submissions made by the
learned Standing counsel of the department, permitted the
appellants to file their forms within the specified period mentioned
in the impugned order in physical form if they failed to do so in
the On-line mode. Such opportunity has not been availed of by
the appellants. There grievance is that availing of such
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
opportunities will lead to further uncertainty. Therefore, they
opted for the "betterment examination" held by the Council.
11. It is a well settled in law that unless it is shown to be
contrary to a statute or the Rules, the academic authorities should
be given their liberty to frame the policies which are based suited
for conducting their functions and in the interest of the student
community. It is not the pleaded case that the guidelines or the
notification are contrary to any existing statue or Rules of the
department. Perusal of the notification reveals that the steps have
been taken by the department in the peculiar circumstances
under the COVID-19 situation. A committee on alternative method
had evaluated the matter and which was approved by the
department. The said notification is also not specifically under
challenge. In deciding matters relating to Education or academics,
writ courts should normally be slow to pass orders and the
educational authorities should be normally left to their decision.
Interference is called for only in the interest of justice1.
12. No material has been placed before us to suggest that the
guidelines/notification relating to the process of evaluation has
been arrived at without taking into consideration the relevant
(1992) 2 SCC 220 Bhushan Uttam Khare Vs Dean, B.J. Medical College and Others.
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
factors. There is also no material to suggest that the Alternative
Method Committee (AMC) did not take into account relevant
factors in the interest of student community in the report which
have also been subsequently rectified by the department
education and only pursuant to which the notification dated
01.07.2021 was issued.
13. Under the circumstance, we do not find any infirmity in the
orders of the learned Single Judge so as to warrant any
interference. The Writ Appeals are devoid of any merit and the
same are accordingly dismissed.
14. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
15. No order as to cost.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
Writ Appeal No. 354 of 2021 with Writ Appeal No. 17 of 2022
