Class X Student Mistakenly Marked Zero In Board Exams, Punjab & Haryana High Court Imposes 30k Costs On School For Negligence

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has imposed a cost of Rs.30,000 on a School which mistakenly gave zero marks to a Class X board student in Haryana.

Due to the school's negligence, the marks of two students with identical names were interchanged, and the student who was marked zero in the 2021 exam could not appear for their Class XII board exams as a result.

While directing the CBSE to issue a fresh mark sheet for the student, Justice Vikas Behal said, "it would be relevant to note that on account of the mistake made by the school not only the petitioner has suffered but even the respondent-Board had to suffer litigation expenses in the present case without there being any fault on their account."

It was further noted that the "casual approach" of the school was evident from the fact that, despite being served notice, they chose not to assist the Court, and the averments made in the petition were not rebutted by them.

Since the petitioner submitted that she did not seek any compensation, the Court imposed a cost of Rs. 30,000 on the school for its negligence and directed it to submit the same to the Board.

The Court was hearing the plea of a student, seeking correction of her results and for issuance of a corrected detailed marks certificate.

It was submitted that the petitioner despite appearing in the exams was marked zero and another student with the same name who had left the school was awarded her marks.

The Court noted that "it is specifically stated by the School in a letter sent to CBSE, that while uploading the marks, since the name of the petitioner and the other was same, thus, on account of misunderstanding the result was wrong interchanged while uploading."

However, when the petitioner requested the board to rectify the marks, she was told that the school did not submit the revised marks on the online portal in the prescribed window.

It was also submitted that despite repeated requests, the school kept insisting that the application had been forwarded to the board, but took no further action.

Considering the submissions, the Court observed that, "the petitioner is stated to have cleared her 11th class examination and could not give 12th class examination on account of the mistake of the school and in case the necessary directions are not passed in favour of the petitioner, then her future would be jeopardized."

 In light of the above, the Court set aside the order of the Board rejecting the request of the petitioner to rectify her marks and directed them to declare a fresh result.

Appearance: Advocates Akshit Mehta and Ashish Gupta for the petitioner.

Naveen Singh Panwar, DAG, Haryana.

B.S.Seemar, Advocate for respondents no.2 and 3-Board.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (PH) 256

Case Title: Riya v. State of Haryana and others

Click here to read/download the order