Research › Search › Judgment

Tripura High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 383 (TRI)

Aparajita Das v. Union of India

2022-09-27

ARINDAM LODH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. P. Roy Barman, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. A. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Datta Majudmer, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Halam appearing for the respondent no.2, Mr. Somik Deb, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.3 and Mr. B. Majumder, learned Asstt. S.G. appearing for the respondent nos.1 and 4. 2. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- 'Under the circumstances stated above, it is submitted, that the Hon'ble High Court would be kind enough to:- (I) Issue rules upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and direction of like nature shall not be issued directing the Respondents quashing and cancelling the Senior Examination Results 2021 of the Petitioner as declared by the CBSE. (II) Issue rules upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and direction of like nature shall not be issued directing the Respondents to declare Senior School Certificate Examination, 2021 of the Petitioner in terms of Notification dated 17.06.2021 issued by the CBSE. (III) Issue rules upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and direction of like nature shall not be issued whereby declaring that in terms of Notification, dated 17.06.2021 the Petitioner scored 46+27=73 marks in Chemistry, Physics 49+30=79 marks and in Mathematics 54+18=72 marks in Central Board of Secondary Education Examination 2021. (IV) Pass an interim order directing IIT Bombay to keep 1 seat vacant in Bachelor of Design Coarse and/or to give provisional admission to the Petitioner subject to outcome of the Writ Petition. (V) Make rules absolute. (VI) Call for records. (VII) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court considered fit and proper.' 3. Briefly stated, the petitioner was a student of Assam Riffles Public School at Agartala, the respondent no.3 herein. She has challenged her result of the Senior School Examination 2021 declared by the respondent-CBSE. It is stated that due to pandemic situation no examination could be conducted. The marks were allotted under a specific guideline issued by CBSE under the approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. She has challenged her result of the Senior School Examination 2021 declared by the respondent-CBSE. It is stated that due to pandemic situation no examination could be conducted. The marks were allotted under a specific guideline issued by CBSE under the approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner has stated that in terms of CBSE Notification dated 17.06.2021, her final marks would be as under:- Subjects Class X Marks (Best 3 Average=78) 80% of 78 (A) 30% of Class X(A) (B) Class XI 30% of Class XI (C) Class XII Marks (1st+2nd) Screening Tests(D) 40% of Class XII Marks (D) (E) Total (B)+(C)+(E) Physics 62 19 33 10 32+36=68 (70% of 68)=47 19 48 Chemistry 62 19 13 4 22+37=59 (70% of 59)=41 16 39 Maths 62 19 27 8 41+25=67 (80% of 67)=54 22 49 4. The petitioner in her affidavit by way of rejoinder has stated that, as per the tabulation sheet of respondent no.3, 21 marks was erroneously deducted from Physics, 18 marks was erroneously deducted from Chemistry, and 25 marks was deducted from Mathematics. Such deduction was in violation of the CBSE Notification dated 17.06.2021, for the simple reason, that, the Notification dated 17.06.2021 held that variation due to standardization shall be only +/- 5 marks. 5. The marks as shown in the above chart have not been disputed by the respondent-CBSE. At Para 10 of its counter affidavit the marks obtained by the petitioner is admitted. It is clarified in the guideline that average of best 3 subjects out of main 5 subjects is to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the marks to give benefit to the students omitting the scores of the subjects in which they underperformed due to any reasons. It is clarified in the guideline that average of best 3 subjects out of main 5 subjects is to be taken into account for the purpose of calculating the marks to give benefit to the students omitting the scores of the subjects in which they underperformed due to any reasons. 5.1 The broad distribution of marks assigned to various components on the basis of which the final marks of every student would be computed is as under:- Theory Marks Practical/IA Marks Total Marks Class X 30% Class XI 30% Class XII 40% Class XII Class X Class XI Class XII 80 24 24 32 20 24 24 52 70 21 21 28 30 21 21 58 60 18 18 24 40 18 18 64 50 15 15 20 50 15 15 70 30 09 09 12 70 09 09 82 5.2 Clause 8 of the said guideline deals with the computation of theory marks, which is as under: '8 (a) Class XII Theory Marks The computation of theory marks for class XII will be based on performance in one or more Unit Test(s)/Mid-Term/Pre-Board(s) theory examination. The result committee of the school may decide wightage to be given to each exam based on the credibility and realibility of the assessment. For example, if the committee may be of the considered view that only the Pre-Board exams may be taken into consideration, then a full weightage can be given to that component. Similarly, another school Result committee may decide to give equal weightage to Pre-Board exams and Mid-Term exams. As for as Unit Test(s)/Mid-Term/Pre-Board Examination(s) are concerned during the session 2020-2021, following is possible:- there may be differences in terms of the mode of conduct of examination i.e. Online/Offline. that some of the students may not have appeared in any or some of the examinations conducted by schools. In all the above cases, Result Committee constituted by the School will have to address these challenges based on the analysis and study of the situation prevailing in the school and thereafter draw up a criterion for the assessment of Class-XII component. Committee is fully responsible to take any decision after analysis and study of the situation prevailing in the school and with the students. The aim should be to cover as broad a range of assessment objectives as possible. Committee is fully responsible to take any decision after analysis and study of the situation prevailing in the school and with the students. The aim should be to cover as broad a range of assessment objectives as possible. The Rationale for the criteria should be well thought out, objective and should be documented in the form of Rationale document (Annesure-2), explaining in detail how the school assessed marks of Class-XII component. (a) the reasons for the weightage given to different exams/tests. (b) in cases where students have not appeared in none of the tests/exam categories then basis for the assessment should be indicated. The committee should, in all cases, clearly record all its decisions in writing with the reasons in the Rationale document and take decision. (b) Class XI Theory Marks Computation of class XI theory marks shall be on the basis of year end final theory exam in respective subjects. (c) Class X Theory Marks Computation of class X theory marks shall be based on average theory marks obtained by the student(s) in best three performing subjects out of main 5 subjects. This average will be uniformly awarded to all the class XII subjects based on theory weightage. To facilitate ease in entering the theory marks of class X, the Board will provide the marks for the students who have appeared in CBSE class X examinations. For students of other Boards, the schools will have to enter the information based on the class X mark sheets of the students available with schools.' 6. Thereafter, the marks are to be standardized, moderated and aligned as per Clause 10 of the said guideline. The grievance of the petitioner is that the standardization, moderation and alignment of the marks had not been properly done by the school authority, as such, in two subjects i.e. Chemistry and Mathematics she secured less than the pass mark i.e. compartmental and thus, to repeat theory papers, that is, in Chemistry and Mathematics. 7. Considering the grievance of the petitioner, I have given my thoughtful consideration to the statements made in the respective counter affidavits filed by the School concerned i.e. the Assam Riffles Public School, the respondent no.3 and the respondent-Board as well. 7.1 At the outset, I may reproduce Para 17 of the counter affidavit of the CBSE which is as under:- '17. 7.1 At the outset, I may reproduce Para 17 of the counter affidavit of the CBSE which is as under:- '17. That with regards the contents of Para 14 of the petition I say that as per clause 10 of the Notification dated 17.06.2021 the concerned school is required to standardize marks of Class XI and XII by internally moderate the marks to account for the school level variation by using a reliable reference standard. The school shall calculate the total theory marks for each student by adding the marks for the class X, XI and XII as per the weightage of each class. Thereafter based on the total marks, moderation shall be carried out by the school in Class XI and Class XII. Scaling up or scaling down of Class XI and Class XII marks may have to be done in affair and transparent manner by the result Committee. I further submit that as per Clause 10(a) of the Notification historical performance of the school, in terms of the best overall performance in the previous three years Board Examination will be taken as the reference for moderating the marks assessed by the school for 2020-2021. As per Sub clause (b) of clause 10 of the Notification it was stipulated that subject wise marks assessed by the school for 2021-2021 should be within a range of +/- 5 marks obtained by the students in the school in the subject in the reference year. However, the overall average marks for the school assessed in 2020-2021, for all the subjects, should not exceed the overall average marks obtained by the school by 2 marks in the specific reference year. In case date for a school for only two years is available then the best performance out of two years will be taken and in case, data is available for only year, the same will be taken. Furthermore, in schools, wherever the students are appearing in the Class XII Board Examination for the first time and hence, have no historical date available, the Board will provide the historical data in the manner provided in clause (I)(ii) & (iii) (d)10 of the Notification. The marks of the petitioner might have been scale down following the above criteria. This policy is for all and the same is not aimed at a particular student. Therefore, there is no prima facie case established by the petitioner. The marks of the petitioner might have been scale down following the above criteria. This policy is for all and the same is not aimed at a particular student. Therefore, there is no prima facie case established by the petitioner. It is not a fact that awarding of marks in the Class XII Board Examination 2021 is beyond the criteria as notified in Notification dated 17.06.2021.' 7.2 Next, the respondent-Assam Rifles Public School in their counter affidavit has stated thus: '2.2 With reference to the statements/averments/contentions made in Paragraph-4 of the WP, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that based on the marks statement of Class-X, and according to the Guidelines of the CBSE Notification dated 17.06.2021, the average theory marks, obtained by a student, in best 3 performing subjects out of maximum 5 subjects, was uploaded in the CBSE Result Tabulation Sheet Online. Accordingly, the calculation for Class X component of the petitioner is as under:- Average of best 3 main subjects (including practical) of the petitioner is (73+72+86)/3=77. Average of Theory component of the petitioner is 77-20 (internal assessment)=57. Therefore, 30% of 57 stands to 17, and hence, the petitioner's claim of 19 is incorrect. It is most humbly and respectfully submitted that in Class XI, as per the Marks Statement (Annexure-2 to the WP), submitted by the petitioner, the theory marks in:- (i) Chemistry is 13.30% component whereof would stand at 3.9 (rounded off to 4), (ii) Physics is 33.30% component whereof would stand at 9.9 (rounded off to 10), and (iii) Mathematics is 27.30% component whereof would stand at 8. xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx 2.5 With reference to the statements/averments/contentions made in Paragraphs-7 & 8 of the WP, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that the results of Class X and XII were strictly tabulated as per the Guidelines laid down by the respective Board, and hence, the answering respondent No.3 cannot be held liable. xxxx xxxx xxxx 2.7 With reference to the statements/averments/contentions made in Paragraph-10 of the WP, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that after uploading of Class X, XI and XII component on the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE for short) website separately, further calculation and tabulation was auto done by the CBSE. xxxx xxxx xxxx 2.7 With reference to the statements/averments/contentions made in Paragraph-10 of the WP, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that after uploading of Class X, XI and XII component on the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE for short) website separately, further calculation and tabulation was auto done by the CBSE. Thereafter, the CBSE provided the moderated marks, based on the historical performance of individual students in every subjects for which the respondent No.3, cannot be held responsible. xxxx xxxx xxxx 2.9 With reference to the statements/averments/contentions made in Paragraphs-12, 13, 14 & 15 of the WP, it is most humbly and respectfully submitted that for resolution of the dispute, the petitioner had submitted a representation, in connection wherewith, the Dispute Committee had checked her Tabulation Sheet again and again, but no error was found in the said Tabulation. It is pertinent to mention herein that the CBSE had not conducted examination for the academic year 2020-2021, and hence, there is no such option of review. So the claim of the petitioner of review of her result is totally illogical. It is further stated that the calculations, as shown in Paragraph 13 of the WP does not conform to the CBSE norms of tabulation. Moreover, she has not taken into account moderation of marks, brought about in every subject of all students, as per the directions of the CBSE, based on the historical performance of the school in the subjects in the previous years' board results.' 8. Mr. Datta Majumder, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent-CBSE has clarified the situation. Mr. Datta Majumder, learned senior counsel has submitted that the standardization and moderation of marks were done by the School considering the historical backgrounds etc. and also taking into account its performance in the previous three years. Thereafter, these marks were aligned with the broad distribution of marks given by the CBSE and then, it was placed in the portal of CBSE and if it appeared to be matched with the standard of marks in the portal, in that case only the portal would accept the respective marks of the students. If there was any mismatch, then, the portal would not accept it. Thereafter, overall marks will be allocated by the CBSE on the basis of which certificates indicating the marks obtained by a particular student were issued. 9. If there was any mismatch, then, the portal would not accept it. Thereafter, overall marks will be allocated by the CBSE on the basis of which certificates indicating the marks obtained by a particular student were issued. 9. On consideration of the submissions advanced by learned counsels appearing for the parties and an overview of the above procedures as are indicated in the guideline, in my opinion, it is a special procedure adopted by the Board being approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in special circumstances. The court cannot doubt the allocation of marks being placed in the portal on the basis of which overall assessment made by the School in favour of a particular student. Moreover, it is found that the petitioner had approached the Result Committee constituted to resolve all disputes arising out of declaration of results including distribution of marks to the students. The said Committee had examined the claim of the petitioner time and again and ultimately, no error was detected in the allocation/tabulation of marks. 10. In the opinion of this court, the Committee has been formed by the experts and in this circumstance, it will not be prudent to sit over the findings of the Expert Committee on the basis of which tabulation/distribution of marks was carried out. There cannot be any doubt that the Result Committee constituted by the experts had specialised knowledge on the subject in issue and the Court has limited scope to interfere with the process of evaluation of marks in a particular subject or subjects. 11. Accordingly, I do not find any material to interfere with the result declared by the CBSE in respect of the petitioner. 12. In the result, the instant writ petition fails and accordingly, stands dismissed.