Madras High Court
S.Joshika vs 4 Gta Vidhya Mandir on 30 July, 2021
WP.No.18726 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 28.10.2021
Pronounced on : 02.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Writ Petition No.18726 of 2021
and
WMP No.19994 of 2021
S.Joshika ...Petitioner
Vs.
1 The Central Board of Secondary Education
Rep by its Secretary
Shiksha Kendra
2 Community Centre
Preet Vihar
Delhi- 110 092.
2 The Regional Officer
CBSE
New No.3 old No.1630 A
“J” Block 16th Main Road
Anna Nagar West
Chennai- 600 040.
3 The Chief Educational Officer
Kanchipuram District
Kanchipuram
Tamil Nadu.
4 GTA Vidhya Mandir
(Code No.1930281)
Rep by The Principal
GTA Vidhya Mandir Neelankarai Chennai- 600 115. ..Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/15
WP.No.18726 of 2021
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the
4th respondent pertaining to the publication of result of the petitioner for
Standard 12 dated 30.07.2021 along with the impugned reply email dated
13.8.2021 and quash the same as illegal and direct the 4th respondent to
calculate the 12th standard CBSE marks of the petitioner as per the Policy for
Tabulation of marks for class XII Board Examination 2021 dated 17.06.2021
and the circular dated 08.08.2021 issued as per the order of the Honble
Supreme court in W.P. No.522 of 2021 in the matter of Mamta Sharma Vs
CBSE and others and award the scores as per the table II or III of the
representation submitted by petitioner's father dated 12.08.2021.
For Petitioner : Mrs.A.Arulmozhi
For Respondents : Mr.G.Nagarajan
Central Government Standing Counsel
for R1, R 2
Mr.A.Selvendran
Government Advocate
for R 3
Mr.S.Ashok Kumar
for R 4
ORDER
A student who did her higher secondary course in the 4 th
Respondent school and who is aggrieved with the marks assigned to her in
the class XII board examination in 2021, has knocked the doors of this court,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
challenging the results published by the 4th Respondent school and for a
consequential direction to calculate the 12th std CBSE marks of the Petitioner
as per the policy formulated by the 1st Respondent through notification dated
17.06.2021.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the Petitioner underwent
higher secondary course in the 4th Respondent school during the academic
years 2019-2021 in an integrated batch. Due to the covid 19 pandemic, the
CBSE cancelled class XII board examinations through notification dated
01.06.2021 and on 17.06.2021, the CBSE published the policy for calculation
of marks for class XII board examinations prescribing the method of
assessment and awarding marks to students.
3. The 4th Respondent school adopted the notification issued by
the CBSE and declared the results of the students for Class XII. The Petitioner
was awarded a score of 76%. The Petitioner was not satisfied with the
manner in which the calculation was made by the 4 th respondent school and
according to her, it is not in line with the method of assessment prescribed by
CBSE. Hence, the father of the petitioner made a reprresentation on
12.08.2021 in this regard. This was forwarded by the 2nd Respondent to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
4th Respondent school. The 4th Respondent school through e-mail dated
13.08.2021 informed the Petitioner that the marks awarded to her are as per
the policy of the class XII board examination 2020-21. Aggrieved by the
same, the present Writ Petition has been filed before this court.
4. Heard Mrs.A.Arulmozhi, learned Counsel for the petitioner,
Mr.G.Nagarajan, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for R1, R 2,
Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Government Counsel for R 3 and Mr.S.Ashok Kumar,
leanred Counsel for R 4.
5. The education system and particularly the students who
underwent the higher secondary course during the academic year 2020-21,
faced a huge challenge due to the covid-19 pandemic. Considering the
virulent nature of the virus which spreads very fast through the air, it was
decided to confine education during the entire academic year through online
mode. The efforts taken to conduct the class XII examination failed since the
situation was not under control and the central and state governments
decided not to expose the children to the deadly virus. Hence, the CBSE
through notification dated 01.06.2021, cancelled the board examinations for
Class XII. As a consequence, a notification was issued by the CBSE, dated
17.06.2021 wherein they devised a policy for tabulation of marks for class XII
board examinations 2021 and for awarding marks to the students as per the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
assessment and calculation provided in the notification. In fact, this policy was
placed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a case that was pending in
Mamtha Sharma v. CBSE &Ors and the Hon’ble supreme court on being
satisfied with the scheme formulated by the CBSE, directed the CBSE to
proceed further to assess the marks and publish the results of the students.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court further directed the CBSE to also provide for a
dispute resolution mechanism in the policy and notify the policy.
6. Pursuant to the above, the notification dated 17.06.2021 was
issued. On a careful reading of the notification, it is seen that the same
involves a four step process as described below:-
The concerned school does not have any control or say in so far as the fixing
of historical performance of the school based on the theory marks for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
previous three years, year-wise average of total marks of main subjects for
previous three years and the subject-wise distribution of marks for the highest
performance year/ reference year which is 2020 in the present case. These
data are made available by the CBSE to the respective schools.
7.On receipt of this data, the result committee that is formed as
per the notification will align/moderate the average marks of the students
within the broad distribution of marks as provided by the board. It must be
borne in mind that the result committee consists of the principal of the school,
two senior-most teachers of the school teaching class XII and two teachers
from senior secondary schools teaching class XII co-opted as external
members. Thus, the result committee consists of totally 5 members. It is
made very clear in the notification itself that the process of moderation will be
done in the interest of fairness and to ensure that the marks allocated are
comparable and there is no adverse impact or undue gain for any student
because of the methodology/processes of evaluation that is adopted by the
concerned school.
8.The result committee will have to follow the broad distribution
of marks which will be based on the performance in the reference year by the
concerned school, in the concerned subject. The subject-wise assessment
made by the school should be within the range of +/- 5 marks obtained by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
the school in the subject during the reference year. The overall marks for the
school assessed in 2021-21, for all the subjects, should not exceed the overall
average marks obtained by the school in the specific reference year by
2 marks.
9.As per the notification dated 17.06.2021, the mode of
assessment of marks will be done in the following manner.
[a] 30% of marks (on the average of theory marks obtained by
the students in best 3 performing subjects out of main 5 subjects) of
10thPublic Examination.
[b] 30% of marks of 11th Annual Examination.
[c] 40% of marks of either in unit test(s)/mid-term/pre-board(s)
or combined as decided by the result committee.
10.Clauses 10(h) and 10(i) makes it very clear that the
concerned school cannot allocate marks arbitrarily to the students since the
moderation/distribution of marks has to be in conformity with the broad
distribution of marks and if there is any mismatch, the concerned school will
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
not be able to upload the marks in the web portal of CBSE. Only if the marks
allotted are within the built-in checks and balances provided by the 1 st
Respondent, the concerned school will be able to upload the marks on the
board’s web portal.
11.If any student is not satisfied with the
assessment/moderation done by the results committee, a dispute resolution
mechanism is provided by CBSE through circular dated 08.08.2021. The
nature/types of disputes are also explained in the said circular. This complaint
will go before the committee constituted under the circular. The committee
shall assess the complaints and inform its decision to the aggrieved students
and such decision taken by the committee will be final and binding on the
candidate. If the student is aggrieved even thereafter, the policy itself gives
an opportunity to the student to appear in the improvement examination to
be conducted by the board as and when the situation becomes conducive and
the marks secured by the candidate in that examination will be considered as
final.
12.In the present case, the committee has informed the student
through e-mail dated 13.08.2021 that the concern raised by the candidate
was verified and it was found that the marks awarded are in line with the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
policy of class XII board examination 2020-21. Aggrieved by the decision, the
student has approached this Court.
13.Before going into the grievance expressed by the Petitioner,
this court must bear in mind the caution given by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in Anand Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2020 SCC OnLine
823. The relevant paragraph in the said judgment is extracted hereunder:
37. We say so in view of the fact that matters of education
must be left to educationists, of course subject to being governed by
the relevant statutes and regulations. It is not the function of this
Court to sit as an expert body over the decision of the experts,
especially when the experts are all eminent people as apparent from
the names as set out. This aspect has received judicial imprimatur
even earlier and it is not that we are saying something new.
14.It is also brought to the notice of this court that a similar
grievance was raised by a class XII student on the assessment of marks and
this issue is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in WP(C) No. 1081 of
2021. In the said case, CBSE has taken a very specific stand in the counter-
affidavit to the effect that a special software was developed by the board and
the evaluation policy took into consideration the historical performance of the
school, subject wise mean, overall school average and moderation criteria and
this software was developed and sent to all the schools concerned. Therefore,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
there cannot be any deviation from the evaluation policy which has been
approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the Mamthasharma case.
15.In the present case, the only grievance that has been
expressed by the Petitioner is that for the XII standard, the 40% marks was
based on the best performance of the Petitioner in the half-yearly
examination. According to the Petitioner, there is a reduction of 26 marks and
the total marks ought to have been 408 marks and instead the result
committee has awarded the total of only 382 marks. To explain the stand
taken by the Petitioner, the reply affidavit has been field by the Petitioner. The
Petitioner has complained that there is absolutely no reason adduced by the
4th Respondent school for reducing 26 marks from the total marks of the
Petitioner which results in a loss of 5.2% in the total marks and this according
to the Petitioner, will impact her from securing seats in professional courses.
16.The learned counsel for the 4th Respondent has filed written
submissions and explained the manner in which the result committee
calculated the marks. According to the learned counsel for the 4th
Respondent, the marks that were awarded to a student cannot be taken as it
is and the moderation/ distribution of marks must be in consonance with the
broad distribution of marks. If there is any mismatch, the concerned school
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
will not be able to upload the marks in the board’s web portal.
17.On the face of it, the claim made by the Petitioner seems to
be persuasive and the Petitioner has straight away taken 40% of the XII std
half yearly theory marks and has arrived at a total of 408. Whereas, as per
the result committee, the total is arrived at 382. The Petitioner lost sight of
one very important factor that has been provided in the policy notification.
The moderation of marks is done by the results committee as per the
tabulation provided by the board. The result committee at the time of
moderating the marks, has to necessarily take into consideration the
performance of school in the reference year which will have a direct impact in
ascertaining the marks of the students and the moderation will be done in
proportion to the performance of the school and it is not based only on the
marks secured by the student during the academic year 2020-21. The
moderation done by the result committee as explained in the written
submission of the 4th Respondent, does not reveal any apparent mistake. If
the 4th Respondent school had awarded more marks to the Petitioner while
moderating the same, the board’s web portal would not have even uploaded
the marks. The fact that the marks were properly uploaded in the web portal
shows that the moderation was done by the results committee as per the
broad distribution of marks provided by the board.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
18.The Petitioner has not alleged any malafides or ill-will against
the 4th Respondent school. There was no need for the result committee to
target the Petitioner and to award her lesser marks. The policy issued by the
CBSE sufficiently provided for checks and balances and once the mark
awarded by the result committee pass muster and is uploaded in the portal,
the same cannot be interfered by the court unless illegality stares on the face
of it. This court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India cannot get into the nitty-gritties and indulge in
calculation of marks. If the court start doing this exercise, there will be no end
to it and the court will be burdened with loads of writ petitions filed by
students who will seek for a similar relief. It will virtually open flood-gates and
will pave way for further docket explosion.
19.The policy itself makes it very clear that if a student is not
satisfied with the assessment, such a student will be given an opportunity to
appear in examination to be conducted by the board when the situation is
conducive. Such an opportunity sufficiently safeguards the interest of the
students. It is also0 made abundantly clear that the marks secured by the
student in such an examination will be taken as final.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
20.The CBSE has come up with a workable model to tide over
the situation and the policy was also authorised by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
and hence the student has to accept the moderation of marks without any
demur. If the student is not satisfied, it is always left open to the student to
write the examination as an when conducted by the CBSE. Beyond this, this
court does not want to interfere with each and every result that is determined
by the result committee.
21.In view of the above discussion, this Court is not inclined to
interfere with the decision taken by the respondents and the relief sought for
by the Petitioner cannot be granted by this Court
22.In the result, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.11.2021
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
KP
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
To
1 The Central Board of Secondary Education
Rep by its Secretary
Shiksha Kendra
2 Community Centre
Preet Vihar
Delhi- 110 092.
2 The Regional Officer
CBSE
New No.3 old No.1630 A
“J” Block 16th Main Road
Anna Nagar West
Chennai- 600 040.
3 The Chief Educational Officer
Kanchipuram District
Kanchipuram
Tamil Nadu.
4 GTA Vidhya Mandir
(Code No.1930281)
Rep by The Principal
GTA Vidhya Mandir Neelankarai Chennai- 600 115.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
WP.No.18726 of 2021
N.ANAND VENKATESH.,J
KP
Pre-Delivery Order in
Writ Petition No.18726 of 2021
02.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
