"Further Process Even After Re-Evaluation Is Unjustifiable": Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea Assailing CBSE Scheme For Re-Evaluation
Observing that it is unjustifiable to require a further process to be undertaken even after re-evaluation, the Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a petition seeking general directions regarding CBSE scheme for re-evaluation of papers. A single judge bench comprising of Justice Prateek Jalan ordered thus: "When the process of re-evaluation itself is one which may or may not be provided,...
Observing that it is unjustifiable to require a further process to be undertaken even after re-evaluation, the Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a petition seeking general directions regarding CBSE scheme for re-evaluation of papers.
A single judge bench comprising of Justice Prateek Jalan ordered thus:
"When the process of re-evaluation itself is one which may or may not be provided, it cannot be said that candidates have to be given further chances at improving their marks. There has to be a point at which the process ends, and the marks awarded to a candidate attain finality."
The observation came in a plea filed by one Shreem Mittal, a student who had appeared for CBSE examination 2020 for Class XII seeking re-evaluation of the marks obtained by her as invoking the procedure laid down in terms of Circular dated 14th July 2020.
On re-evaluation of the answer sheets, the petitioner was awarded one extra mark in two subjects, however, on being unsatisfied, the petition was moved in the High Court seeking directions on CBSE to issue comprehensive plan for revaluation of the answer sheets considering the concerns of the students which should not be discretionary or arbitrary. The plea also sought specific directions for disclosure of reasons and further re-evaluation of the petitioner's answer sheets.
It was thus submitted by the petitioner that the CBSE's method for re-evaluation does not provide any reasoning for addition or deduction of marks and in view of this, the process is arbitrary and discretionary.
On the other hand, CBSE submitted before the Court that re-evaluation of answer scripts cannot be claimed as a right, and is always subject to the rules laid down by the examining authority. The Court was also apprised that the Circular in question provides three levels of checks, and submitted that addition of further stages of supplying reasons, appeal and review would render the evaluation process inconclusive.
Analyzing the aforesaid circular and the three steps mentioned therein, the Court opined that the circular– does not require reasons to be given by the re-evaluating examiner, nor for an appeal or review.
In view of this, the Court held thus:
"Clause III(e) of the Circular specifically excludes appeal/review against the re-evaluation, and the Circular also expressly stipulates that the decisions of the Competent Authority thereunder shall be final. In my view, there is no arbitrariness or unreasonableness in the omission of these provisions."
Furthermore, the bench observed that:
"In its counter-affidavit, the CBSE has pointed out the scale of the examinations conducted by it, and also averred that the entire process of re-evaluation is completed within a relatively short time frame, so that the final results are declared in time for candidates to participate in the admissions process in institutions of higher education all over the world. To require a further process to be undertaken even after reevaluation is, in these circumstances, unjustifiable."
With the aforesaid observations, the Court dismissed the petition.
Title: SHREEM MITTAL v. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION