The Supreme Court on Friday adjourned hearing on a petition seeking issuance of a writ mandamus or any other writ to direct the Central Board of Secondary Education to apply the formula of 30:30:40 in computation of marks for Class XII.
The Apex Court directed Counsel for the petitioner, Advocate Kartik N. Shukla, to file an additional affidavit to articulate the case of individual petitioners’ as he was unable to show the specific grievance he had and the representations that he had made to the respondents for the same. Court directed the matter to be listed after 2 weeks.
Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
The present Writ Petition has been filed in the Supreme Court. Petitioners have prayed by issuing a writ of mandamus or any other writ to direct CBSE to apply the formula of 30:30:40 as mentioned in the policy and approved by this Hon’ble Court in the matter of Mamta Sharma
The petitioners are aggrieved by the act of the Respondents because they have failed to apply the formula of 30:30:40 as approved by the Supreme Court.
“The Clause of 8(1) of the Tabulation Policy provides that the computation marks of XIIth Standard will be based on performance in one or more Unit Test(s)/Mid Term/Pre-Board(s) theory examinations.
The result committee of School may decide weightage to be given to each exam based on the credibility and reliability of the assessment.
It further provides discretion to the School, to devise its own methodology in situation when students could not appear in any of the tests or some of the tests conduct by the School.
Further, Clause 20 of the Tabulation Policy, provides that if students of a School could not appear in any assessment in the XIIth Standard, then the School will do an objective 21 assessment of students, using information of Class Xth, Class Xlth and Class XIIth, by recording evidence in this regard for awarding 40 percent marks.
As regards the 30 percent component of Class Xth and XIth, it ought to have been based on the final theory exam of the respective year.
In the present case, practcal exams were the only internal assessment conducted by the Respondent No. 2 in Class XIIth.
CBSE, Regional Director, CBSE, Pune and AIN International School, ought to have awarded marks in the theory portion, on the basis of above said assessment.
However, it is apparent that the marks of petitioners are not proportionate, or even based on practical examination
conducted by the CBSE.”
The petitioners have not challenged the policy / guideline dated 17/06/2021 of the CBSE but the breach of the said policy by school and the CBSE.
They have also challenged the communication dated July 15, 2021, by which CBSE specifically mandated that School cannot have more students in the
range of 95 percent and above, than the number of students in the same range of preceding reference years.
Furthermore, the consequences of implementation of the Moderation Policy have been patently unfairly, unjust and arbitrary.
In the present case, the school has not explained the methodology used for assessment of the marks and has not shared the subject wise marks
of the students on the pretext of “Internal Constraints”.
The mid-term examination marks of the petitioners do not correspond with the final results published by CBSE. The petitioners approached the Bombay High Court at Nagpur, which passed the order on October 26, 2021.
“We are of prima facie opinion that the tabulation scheme having been once examined by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it would be appropriate for the petitioners to consider approaching the Hon’ble Supreme Court for challenging the modification introduced to a scheme,
already approved by the Supreme Court.”
In view of the above mentioned order, the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the petition. Thereafter, they have approached the SC.