Mr. Anshul Gupta appearing-in-person had urged that it would be appropriate to direct the concerned Boards to conduct the XII standard examination for the academic year 2020-21, and to set aside their decision to cancel the examinations and declare results on the basis of internal assessment marks as propounded in the Scheme.
COURT HEARING TODAY (22.06.2021)
(A) Board is not bound by the Institutions who conducted exams
It is not possible to accede to this suggestion. The fact that other Boards or institutions have been able to conduct an examination does not necessarily mean that the Boards before us are bound by that dispensation. The Boards are autonomous Boards and are entitled to evolve their schemes independently.
The Boards before us have taken the decision to cancel the examinations, which according to them, is in the larger public interest including the body of students pursuing education with them.
(B) Scope of discussion before the court
Even on the earlier occasion, a similar question was raised and the apex court had clearly indicated that the limited question that requires examination is about the fairness and appropriateness of the Scheme propounded by the Boards.
The court said will confine the discussion to those aspects raised by Mr Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the intervenors.
(C) Pattern followed earlier
On the other hand, the argument advanced, if the students are given the option of accepting the internal assessment marks, the results could be declared before 31.07.2021 and despite the declaration of those results, they may still have the option of appearing in the examination for improvisation, if they so choose to.
On the other hand, if the students are given the option of accepting the internal assessment marks, the results could be declared before 31.07.2021 and despite declaration of those results, they may still have the option of appearing in the examination for improvisation, if they so choose to.
The court said it is worthwhile to note that a somewhat similar Scheme was adopted in the previous academic year and the body of students accepted the internal assessment results. Hardly, 10 students from I.C.S.E. and 15000 from C.B.S.E. availed of the option to appear in the examination for improvisation of marks. Suffice it to observe that it is not possible to accede to the suggestion given by Mr Vikas Singh, learned senior counsel, in this behalf.
(D) Private, Patrachar, second compartment students
The court said it agrees with the Attorney General that the analogy in paragraph 7 of the said Scheme cannot be applied to the students falling in the category of private, patrachar and second compartment.
The present Scheme provides that examination will be duly conducted in which all these candidates can appear as private candidates and such examination will be conducted between 15.08.2021 to 15.09.2021 and the results would be declared at the earliest so that even these students would be in a position to pursue their further education, if they so desire.
(E) All aspect examined
Of three years of the students is being reckoned for internal assessment in the Scheme propounded by C.B.S.E. That, in his view, is unfair and irrational according to intervenors counsel.
On the other hand, the court find force in the submission canvassed by learned Attorney General for India that the Scheme is a composite Scheme and has been formulated by the expert body which was appointed by the Board consisting of thirteen members.
All aspects have been taken into account by the expert body on the basis of which the final decision to cancel the examination was taken, including formulation of the Scheme to have holistic approach and to ensure that no candidate/student is prejudiced.
Instead, the Scheme intends to rationalize the internal assessment performance and bring semblance of parity amongst the assessment of different schools. This exercise will be undertaken by a broad-based Result Committee. It is, therefore, not open to us to have a second look. We would instead uphold the Scheme as propounded by the respective Boards, which, as aforesaid, are independent and autonomous bodies and entitled to take their own decision with regard to the affairs of conducting examination by them.
(F) Argument of manipulation of the record
It is then submitted that there is the possibility of C.B.S.E. schools manipulating the records as the relevant data on the basis of which internal assessment is to be done is not in the custody or in possession of the C.B.S.E.
Even this submission does not commend to us. We find force in the argument canvassed by learned Attorney General for India that the broad-based Result Committee would examine all aspects of the matter and take decision on the basis of registers maintained by the concerned schools, and inspected by the competent authority. On the basis of such vague apprehension, the Scheme as has been propounded cannot be doubted.
(G) Declaration of result
The next submission made by Mr Vikas Singh learned senior counsel is that the result should be declared on the same day.
This submission by the learned Attorney General for India was acknowledged which pointed out that U.G.C. will be issuing necessary instructions to ensure that the admission process by the colleges and institutions should commence only after the declaration of results by the C.B.S.E. and I.C.S.E., including the State Boards.
