Research › Search › Judgment

Calcutta High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 173 (CAL)

Akash Sinha v. State of West Bengal

2016-02-16

SUBRATA TALUKDAR

body2016
JUDGMENT : Sri Rajarshi Halder, learned Counsel appears for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was originally a student of Class XI with the Delhi Public School (for short DPS), Megacity and, at this stage the petitioner applied for transfer to a new School, being the Xaviers English School, Konnagar. Sri Halder points out that the former School of the petitioner being DPS, Megacity promoted him from Class XI to Class XII and evidence of such promotion is reflected in the annual term examination report appearing at page 27 of the writ petition. On the basis of such promotion the petitioner-student appeared in the pre-Indian School Certificate (for short ISC) Selection Test Examination of the year 2015 and scored 51% marks. Therefore, it is argued by learned Counsel for the petitioner by referring to the Rules and Regulations of the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination (for short the Council) that it was the responsibility of the Head of the School, meaning thereby DPS, Megacity to assess on a cumulative basis the achievement of the student through out the academic year and promote the candidate from Class XI to Class XII. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner has been duly registered by the Council for the ISC Examination of the year 2016. Sri Sanjay Kumar Baid, learned Counsel appears for the Council and strongly defends the decision not to issue an Admit Card in favour of the petitioner since from both the half yearly and annual term examinations of the petitioner in Class XI it is found that the cumulative minimum marks in four subjects, including English is below 40%. However, learned Counsel for the petitioner equally strongly disputes the contention of Sri Baid on the ground that the cumulative achievement of a candidate is to be assessed for his entire year’s performance in Class XI, including internal examination and, not only on the basis of half yearly and annual examination performance. Relying on two decisions reported in 2007(II) OLR 595 (Saurav Maharana vs. Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations and others) and 2008 (6) AWC 6325 All (Milky Sodhi D/o G.S. Sodhi through her Natural Guardian, Mr. Relying on two decisions reported in 2007(II) OLR 595 (Saurav Maharana vs. Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations and others) and 2008 (6) AWC 6325 All (Milky Sodhi D/o G.S. Sodhi through her Natural Guardian, Mr. G.S. Sodhi vs. Union of India (UOI) through Ministry of Human Resources, Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations through Assistant Secretary, Assistant Secretary, Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations and Seth Anand Ram Jaipuriya School through Principal, Sri Baid argues that it is by now trite law that in cases relating to sending up candidates for the Board Examination, the Courts must avoid liberal equitable reliefs. Sri Biswarup Bhattacharyya, learned Counsel appears for DPS, Megacity and endorses the argument of learned Counsel for the petitioner to the effect that the cumulative assessment of an examinee for the ISC Examination would be the responsibility of the Head of the School and the fact that the petitioner was promoted from Class XI to Class XII demonstrates that the cumulative assessment of his performance justified sending him up for the ISC 2016 Examination. Such assessment is further borne out by the fact that in the pre-ISC Selection Test for the year 2015 in the Commerce Stream the petitioner scored a total of 51%. The School, in which the petitioner is presently admitted, that is the Xaviers English School, Konnagar is not represented today inspite of filing affidavit-of-service. The State is represented by Sri Rajendra Chaturvedi, learned Advocate. Having heard the parties and considering the materials on record this Court at this stage is of the view that the dispute in connection with sending the petitioner for the ISC Examination 2016 revolves around the assessment required of his cumulative achievement in four subjects including English. It is also apparent to this Court that the petitioner was in a transitional phase being admitted from one school to another at a crucial stage of his career. This Court also finds that the respondents be allowed the opportunity to fully demonstrate the cumulative achievement or assessment required of an examinee on affidavit. Therefore, while keeping this writ petition pending this Court directs that there shall be an interim order in terms of prayer (e) of the writ petition. Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of three weeks from date; reply within one week thereafter. Therefore, while keeping this writ petition pending this Court directs that there shall be an interim order in terms of prayer (e) of the writ petition. Affidavit-in-opposition be filed within a period of three weeks from date; reply within one week thereafter. Liberty to mention for inclusion in the list under the heading ‘For Orders’ after the period granted to exchange affidavits is complete. Taking notice of Sri Baid’s submission, this Court further directs that the final result of the petitioner shall only be published with the leave of Court. Later: Sri Baid prays for an order of stay of operation of this order. Such prayer is considered and rejected.