Mohd. Yousuf and Others vs Chairman State Board of School Education and Others

Hasnain Massodi, J.—The Petitioners, as regular students of Government High School, Sangla, appeared in Annual Secondary School

Examination, 2009 at examination Centre No. 411 Higher Secondary School, Gunthal. The examination was cancelled by the Board of Secondary

Education and a fresh date sheet notified for the examination vide No. F (Re-exam-SSE) Reg/W/Z/2009 dated 11th February, 2010 for the said

exam. The Petitioners aggrieved of decision of the Board to cancel the examination and directed re-examination on the grounds detailed in the writ

petition.

The writ petition is opposed on the grounds that the decision has been taken in exercise of power available under Regulation 21 of Regulations

for examinations. It is pleaded that in terms of the said regulation the Chairman of the Board of School Education - Respondent No. 1 herein, is

competent to cancel any examination, partly or wholly, where report is received that unfair means on mass scale were resorted to or the sanctity of

the examination was affected on account of mass copying. It is further pleaded that complaints of mass copying were received in respect of

examination centres 411,703,705 and 706 and that analysis of the results having substantiated the complaints, the examination held at all the

aforesaid examination centres was cancelled and a decision taken to conduct re-examination of the students who appeared in examination in said

centres.

Heard and considered.

J&K Board of School Education is an autonomous body created under J&K State Board of School Education Act, 1975 with the aim and

object to ensure that the education, relates intimately to the development of the potentialities, discovers talent and nurtures and promotes equality

of opportunity by providing necessary facilities. The other objectives of setting up an autonomous Board is to raise the standard of living and

productivity of the State and achieve closer and willing participation of the people in democratic processes. The establishment of Board reflects the

decision to reform, re-organize and reconstruct the existing system of school education. The Board to achieve the above objectives, is saddled

with duty to prescribe courses for institutions, prepare curricula and syllabi, to prescribe text books for the elementary, secondary school and

higher secondary school examinations and above all to conduct public examination for the students who have pursued the secondary school and

higher school education courses. It is onerous and sacred duty of the Board to conduct the examinations in fair and transparent manner, free from

even a remote suspicion of irregularity and entrusted with conduct of an examination, on the grounds of use of unfair means and malpractice in The

Bihar School Examination Board Vs. Subhas Chandra Sinha and Others, . The Court rejecting the contention that the candidates appearing in the

examination, had a right to be heard before the examination, was cancelled, observed:

This is not a case of any particular individual who is being charged with adoption of unfair means but of the conduct of all the examinees or at least

a vast majority of them at a particular centre. If it is not a question of charging any one individually with unfair means but to condemn the

examination as ineffective for the purpose it was held. Must be board given an opportunity to all the candidates to represent their cases. We think

not. It was not necessary for the board to given an opportunity to the candidates if the examinations as a whole were being cancelled. The Board

had not charged any one with unfair means so that he could claim to defend himself. The examination was vitiated by adoption of unfair means on a

mass scale. In these circumstances it would be wrong to insist that the board must hold a detailed inquiry into the matter and examine each

individual case to satisfy itself which of the candidates had not adopted unfair means. The examination as a whole had to go.

The law was reiterated in Chairman, J and K State Board of Education Vs. Feyaz Ahmed Malik and Others, in following words:

While judging the authority or otherwise all steps taken by authorities of the Board to take action against candidates taking part to mass

malpractice it should be borne in mind that the Board is entrusted with the duty of maintaining higher standards of education and proper conduct of

examinations. It is an expert body consisting of persons coming from different walks of life who are engaged in or interested in the field of

education and have wide experience. The decision of such an expert body should be given due weightage by courts.

For the reasons discussed and in view of the settled legal position, challenge to Notification No. No. F (Re-exam-SSE) Reg/W/Z/2009 dated

11th February, 2010, is bound to fail. Viewed thus, the writ petition is dismissed.