A bench of Delhi High Court comprising of Justice Prateek Jalan held that it is generally beyond the remit of the court to enter into an independent evaluation of a candidate’s answers. The bench further observed that the appellant may be unhappy that she could not achieve the scores she had expected but that in itself would not be a ground for the Court to interfere.
Facts of the case:
The Petitioner, a student of Bal Bharti Public School, Delhi, presented a petition concerning the re-evaluation process of the answer sheet followed by the Respondent, Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE). The petitioner sought general directions relating to CBSE’s scheme for re-evaluation and specifically the re-evaluation of her own marks in Political Science and Economics paper of her class 12th exam.
Contention of the petitioner:
The Petitioner in its submissions contends before the Court that
- He assails the CBSE’s method for re-evaluation, as it does not provide any reasoning for addition or deduction of marks.
- He further submitted that the process is arbitrary and discretionary, inasmuch as it does not provide for any appeal or review after the process of re-evaluation.
Contention of the Respondent:
The Respondent contends before the Court that the
- Re-evaluation of answer scripts cannot be claimed as a right, and is always subject to the rules laid down by the examining authority.
- Petitioner having invoked the modalities mentioned in the Circular, cannot now seek modification of the same.
- Circular provided three levels of checks, and submitted that addition of further stages of supplying reasons, appeal and review would render the evaluation process inconclusive.
- CBSE has pointed out the scale of the examinations conducted by it, and also averred that the entire process of re-evaluation is completed within a relatively short time frame, so that the final results are declared in time for candidates to participate in the admissions process in institutions of higher education all over the world. To require a further process to be undertaken even after re-evaluation is, in these circumstances, unjustifiable.
Observation and Judgement:
The court noted that the scope of interference of the writ court in matters of re-evaluation of examination papers is very limited.
It also reiterated Supreme Court’s decision stating that the court should not at all re-evaluate or scrutinise the answer sheets of a candidate—it has no expertise in the matter and academic matters are best left to academics.
It was further observed by the court that when the process of re-evaluation itself is one which may or may not be provided, it cannot be said that candidates have to be given further chances at improving their marks.
It has been further observed by the learned Single Judge that there is no glaring error apparent on the face of the record and the appellant has failed to make out a case for the relief sought.
Keeping in mind the above mentioned circumstances the petition was consequently disposed off.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :
Picture Source :
