Dismissing a plea to cancel board examinations for classes 10 and 12 via physical mode, the Supreme Court said Wednesday that such petitions only give “false hopes” to students preparing for exams and create “more confusion”.
The bench of Justices A M Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and C T Ravikumar, warning the petitioner that it will impose exemplary costs if such petitions are filed again, said: “Entertaining such petitions will only create more confusion… Such petitions give false hopes to students who are going to appear for exams. They will be misled.”
The plea by child rights activist and advocate Anubha Shrivastava Sahai and ‘Student Union of Odisha’ sought direction to state boards, CBSE, CISCE, National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS), which are scheduled to hold exams, to come up with alternate modes of assessment instead of offline exams in view of the pandemic situation.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Prashant Padmanabhan referred to the court’s order last year wherein it had approved CBSE and CISCE’s decision to cancel board exams and provide alternate mode of assessment.
But the bench said that was in the past and cannot be the ground for something now. “That petition we entertained because of a particular situation,” Justice Khanwilkar said. On apprehensions expressed by the counsel, the bench said the situation had not come to what he feared. “Let authorities take a decision. We will not pass any orders. Authorities are working in tandem” to finalise exam dates and if there is any problem once it’s finalised, those aggrieved can approach the authorities concerned.
When the counsel said “it will delay the admission process”, Justice Khanwilkar said: “Who are you to decide that? Who are we to decide? What kind of public interest litigation is being filed?… Such petitions create confusion. Last three days, news items everywhere. This has to stop… Let students do their job and let authorities do their job.”
Justice Maheshwari too said “this creates false hope and confusion”. The bench stopped short of imposing any cost on the petitioners.
Courtesy : The Indian Express