Karnataka High Court
The Director (Exams) vs Ravishankar on 30 March, 2023
Bench: Chief Justice, M.G.S. Kamal
-1-
WA No. 363 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH, 2023
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR PRASANNA B. VARALE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.G.S. KAMAL
WRIT APPEAL NO. 363 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. THE DIRECTOR (EXAMS)
KARNATAKA SECONDARY EDUCATION
EXAMINATION BOARD
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU - 560 003.
2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF
Digitally
SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY
signed by
ROOPA R U (BENGALURU NORTH)
MYSORE BANK CIRCLE
Location:
High Court K G ROAD
of Karnataka BENGALURU-560 009.
3. THE SECRETARY
KARNATAKA SCHOOL
EDUCATION VALUATION BOARD
MALLESHWARAM
BENGALURU-560 003.
...APPELLANTS
(BY SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA)
-2-
WA No. 363 of 2023
AND:
1. RAVISHANKAR
S/O LATE T. RAMASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
No.127, PRECISE KRISHNA APARTMENT
MAHALAKSHMI LAYOUT EXTENSION
BENGALURU - 560 086.
2. HEAD MISTRESS
VIDYA BHARATHI ENGLISH SCHOOL
MAHALAKSHMIPURAM
BENGALURU-560 086.
...RESPONDENTS
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO a)SET
ASIDE/QUASH THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE DATED 27/02/2023 IN WRIT PETITION NO.918/2023
AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, M.G.S.KAMAL J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This Writ appeal is against the order dated
27.02.2023 passed in W.P.No.918/2023 (EDN-RES) in and
by which the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ
WA No. 363 of 2023
petition has directed the respondent No.2-school
(respondent No.3 in the writ petition) to permit the son of
the respondent No.1/petitioner namely, Master.Yugal
Kishore Ravishankar to continue his studies of 10th
standard for which he was admitted under Sanskrit,
English and Hindi as first, second and third language and
to take up the ensuing examination scheduled to
commence from 31.03.2023 by accepting the examination
fee as a special case and has further directed the
respondent No.2-School to impart him the education for
10th standard for which he was admitted with the aforesaid
languages. The respondent No.2-school has also been
directed to issue Admission Card/ Hall Ticket for the
ensuing examination scheduled to commence from
31.03.2023 and to announce the results thereafter.
2. Facts briefly stated are that respondent
No.1/petitioner had changed the school of his son Master
Yugal Kirshore Ravishankar who was studying in 9th
standard during 2021-22 in BGS World School,
WA No. 363 of 2023
Mahalakshmipuram, Bangalore having Central Syllabus
with Hindi, English and Sanskrit as first, second and third
languages respectively to respondent No.2-school having
State Syllabus with languages Sanskrit, English and Hindi
as first, second and third languages during the academic
year 2022-23. This required for him to obtain permission
from the concerned authorities by paying requisite fee.
That he had paid the fee and obtained permission from the
authorities. Having given the permission as sought for,
the authorities are now declining to permit the son of the
petitioner to take up 10th standard examinations on the
premise that he should take up the Kannada language as
one of the third language, failing which he would not be
permitted to take up the exam. This constrained the
respondent No.1/petitioner to approach this Court by filing
the aforesaid writ petition.
3. The said writ petition was resisted on behalf of
the State by filing detailed statement of objections
WA No. 363 of 2023
contending inter alia that though son of the petitioner had
opted Sanskrit, English and Hindi as first, second and third
language, the respondent No.2-School and appellant No.2-
Deputy Director, had accorded permission on a condition
that he should follow syllabus prescribed by the State by
pursuing the Kannada language as one of the three
languages in the 10th standards. That it was not open for
the son of the petitioner to take up only the Sanskrit,
English and Hindi as the first, second and third languages
without Kannada, which is a compulsory language even as
per the Rules prescribed under the Karnataka Secondary
Education Examination Board.
4. After hearing the rival contentions of the
parties, learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition by
the impugned order with directions as noted hereinabove.
Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant/State is before
this Court.
WA No. 363 of 2023
5. Sri. S.S.Mahendra, learned Additional
Government Advocate appearing for the appellants
reiterating the grounds urged in the memorandum of
appeal submits that the Karnataka Secondary Education
Examination Board Act, 1966 and Regulation No.25 of
Annexure-III (Rules and Scheme of the Karnataka
Secondary Education Examination), mandates Kannada
language should be compulsorily selected as one of the
languages either as first, second and third language.
6. He contends that there cannot be any
relaxation of this regulation as the son of the petitioner
had opted to join the respondent No2-school knowing well
that Kannada language has to be compulsorily selected.
He submits that the son of the petitioner had in fact made
payment of fee in respect of Kannada language as seen
from Consolidated Nominal Roll for SSLC Examination
2023 produced at Annexure-R6, wherein at Sl.No.116
name of the son of the petitioner is shown who have paid
WA No. 363 of 2023
fee in respect of Sanskrit, English, Kannada, Mathematics,
Science and Social Science as the subjects. He further
points out that though permission was accorded by the
Deputy Director, Department of Public Instructions
permitting the son of the petitioner to be admitted in the
State syllabus at the respondent No.2-school, the same
was subject to condition of he selecting the language
Group in the State Syllabus. Thus, he submits that in view
of the aforesaid factual aspect of the matter, the
impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge
requires interference as the same has far reaching
consequences if allowed to be sustained. Hence, seeks for
allowing of the appeal.
7. Heard. Perused the records.
8. This is an unfortunate situation as seen from
the records, for no fault of the student in question, has put
him in an unwarranted ordeal. As seen at Annexure-A a
letter dated 22.04.2022 has been issued by the
WA No. 363 of 2023
respondent No.2-Vidya Bharathi English School addressed
to the Deputy Director, DDPI (North), K.G.Road,
Bengaluru the appellant No.2 herein informing him that
Master.Yugal Kishore Ravishankar has been admitted to
10th standard in their school for the academic year 2022-
2023 and that as he studied 9th standard in BGS School
with ICSE Syllabus, the school had suggested him to study
Sanskrit, English and Hindi as first, second and third
languages. Having stated so, the school has sought for
permission to opt above subjects. In response to the said
letter, a memorandum dated 16.05.2022 as per Annexure-
C was issued by the Deputy Director, Administration,
Bangalore North District according permission to the
respondent No.2-school to admit the son of the petitioner
by taking up Sanskrit, English and Hindi as first, second
and third languages. Though it is contended by the learned
Additional Government Advocate that the said permission
was subject to a condition, namely, that it is the
responsibility of the Head Master of the School to ensure
that the selection of language by the student is
WA No. 363 of 2023
inconsonance with the State Syllabus. Thus, based on the
aforesaid condition found at memorandum dated
16.05.2022, learned Additional Government Advocate
emphatically submits that petitioner cannot claim any
relief as he is aware of the condition imposed while
according permission for his admission.
9. Further, learned Additional Government
Advocate drawing attention of this Court to Kannada
language Learning Act, 2015 wherein Kannada language is
made mandatory for all classes in the State of Karnataka
and also drawing attention of this Court to the Karnataka
Secondary Education Examination Board Act, 1966 and
Rules and Regulations and Bye-laws where
Regulation No.25 providing the Kannada language to be
compulsorily selected as one of the languages either first,
second and third language, insist that the impugned order
runs contrary to the aforesaid statutory provisions
requiring interference.
- 10 -
WA No. 363 of 2023
10. We are unable to accept the aforesaid
submission of learned Additional Government Advocate in
the light of the fact that the permission to admit the son of
the petitioner to the 10th standard for the academic year
2022-2023 has been accorded by the none other than the
Deputy Director, Department of Public Instructions,
Government of Karnataka specifically taking note of the
fact that the respondent No.2-school had sought
permission to admit him with Sanskrit, English and Hindi
as first, second and third languages respectively. It
cannot be expected that the authority none other than
Deputy Director, Department of Public Instructions, not to
be aware of the statutory provisions now pressed in
service by the learned Additional Government Advocate
while issuing the said permission. Equally the respondent
No.2-school cannot be expected to be unaware of this
mandatory requirement of Language Policy. The
respondent No.2-school and the Deputy Director,
Department of Public Instructions having issued the
communication/ memorandum referred to above
- 11 -
WA No. 363 of 2023
permitting the son of the petitioner to take up admission
in the 10th standard for the academic year with specific
languages namely, Sanskrit, English and Hindi as first,
second and third languages cannot be permitted now to
turn around at the fag end of the academic year to
contend that the son of the petitioner would not be
allowed to take up examination without the Kannada
language as one of the options. Their representation and
act of according permission as noted hereinabove estops
them from taking up such stands.
11. The reference to payment of fee as found at
Consolidated Nominal Roll for SSLC main examination
2023 is of no avail in the absence of any material to show
that the son of the petitioner had indeed consciously made
a choice to take up Kannada as one of the languages and
had paid fee thereof. On query in this regard by this Court,
learned Additional Government Advocate pleads ignorance
of any such material.
- 12 -
WA No. 363 of 2023
12. The aforesaid facts situation of the matter
would lead irresistible conclusion that no fault can be
found either with the petitioner or his son in getting
admitted with the respondent No.2-school. As taken note
of by learned Single Judge, had respondent No.2-school
and the Deputy Director rejected to accord the permission
for admission as sought for, this unfortunate situation
would not have arisen. Responsibility therefore lies at the
doors of the respondent No.2-School and Deputy Director,
Department of Public Instructions, Bangalore North District
but for whose communication and memorandum son of
the petitioner would not have got admitted with the
aforesaid languages.
13. For the aforesaid reasons, we are unable to
accept the contentions and the grounds urged in the
aforesaid appeal. Appeal lacks merit and same is
dismissed. Order of the learned Single Judge is hereby
confirmed. We further make it clear that the observations
- 13 -
WA No. 363 of 2023
by the learned Single Judge in the order dated 27.02.2023
at paragraphs 29 and 35 are in relation to the peculiar
facts in the said writ petition. The respondents are
directed to comply with order passed by the Learned
Single Judge forthwith, as the examination is scheduled to
commence from 31.03.2023.
Sd/-
CHIEF JUSTICE
Sd/-
JUDGE
RU
