AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
These two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated
16.05.2017 in two writ petitions. The writ petitioners are
students who came through their guardians and Parent Teachers
Association of two schools making a grievance that they are
students of schools in the State of Kerala which schools are
following the Central Board of Secondary Education (for short
''CBSE'') curriculum. Their children having passed Class X
examination, aspire to continue education in the State of Kerala.
In Kerala, school admissions at Plus One level are
centralised by the State of Kerala. What has happened is that
notwithstanding CBSE having announced that due to certain
technical problems, the results of Class X are delayed and would
only be published within the second week of June, 2017, the
authorities of the State have fixed the last date for submission of
application seeking admission to Plus One as 22.05.2017 itself.
The result would be that effectively all CBSE students of the State
who have to pass Class X would be deprived of admissions in
other schools which are not following CBSE curriculum. The
number of such students appearing for Class X examination
under the CBSE curriculum in the State is not a small number. It
is about 72,000 students.
According to learned Government Pleader, last year,
about 42000 CBSE students have applied for admission to Plus
One in the State. If we consider these two figures, it would be
apparent that if the last date for making application is not
extended, then all these 72000 students, who have studied in
Kerala itself, would be deprived of admissions in schools of their
choices in Plus One.
Learned Government Pleader then submits that State
cannot upset the time schedule as has been set up and such a
relaxation or extension of the last date would upset the whole
academic calender. We think that it is a myopic view. We have
to balance the rights of children to receive education as per their
choice with the difficulties of administration. The right of
education and the choice thereof cannot be made subordinate to
administrative difficulties. In our view a mere three weeks delay
in finalising admissions does not upset things to any extent but it
could not justify denying children their rights.
Reserving 10% of the seats would even otherwise be of
no consequence in as much as all the good courses and good
schools would then be occupied by the non-CBSE students, once
again denying them equality and the right of choice. The number
of students as noticed above is not insignificant. Thus, we cannot
countenance this concept of 10% reservation which again is not
exclusively for CBSE students. We may look at it slightly
differently. If the State has no problem in reserving 10% of the
seats where admissions would be finalised and classes would
start three weeks later, will it not amount to classification with no
rational basis? There would be two groups of students in the
same school starting at different times. That would lead to more
administrative chaos than what is being sought to be avoided. It
would not be in the interest of students.
To us, like other professional institutions where
applications are received, pending results, State could have and
ought to have adopted the same procedure, so that all
formalities, data collection would be over and would merely await
for formal results. It would have reduced the time gap.
Unfortunately, State even though was alive to the situation,
chose to ignore and turn a blind eye with the matters of
education and specially at the level of Plus One level. We cannot
permit such unholy discrimination only on the ground of local
board and CBSE. We need say no more.
Lastly, the learned Government Pleader produced before
us a judgment of learned single Judge of this Court dated
04.06.2010 passed in W.P.(C) No.15351 of 2010 ( E.T.
Sreelakshmi and others v. State of Kerala and others ),
wherein the learned single Judge did not allow extension of date
merely on the ground that 5% of the seats would be kept
reserved for supplementary allotment. That was thought to be
just and proper for the reasons indicated above. We are unable
to subscribe to that and in our view, it is not correct. We thus
find no reason to interfere with the order of the learned single
Judge under appeal.
After we had virtually dictated the order, learned
Standing Counsel for the CBSE brought to our notice the
instructions which he had just received. As per the instructions,
apparently because of various other controversies which have
been reported in Press, CBSE is expected to declare Class X
results within the second week of June, 2017. Thus, even the
date as fixed by the learned single Judge may not serve the
purpose. In the extraordinary circumstances with which we are
faced, we would modify the order of the learned single Judge
directing that the State of Kerala will keep open the last date for
making application for admission to the Plus One course for ''two
days'' after declaration of results, meaning thereby, three clear
working days including the date of declaration of CBSE results of
Class X. It would be their duty to publish repeatedly and
adequately such news so that parents and guardians may be
ready to make Online applications, no sooner they are able to get
marks of their children. We hope and trust that the State
realises the exigency of the matter and implement the directions
of this Court in its true spirit.
With the directions and observations above this writ appeals
stand disposed of.