MP Board's Regulation Mandating Students To Opt Same 'Main Subject' In Classes XI And XII Has No Retrospective Application: High Court

While allowing a student to appear for examinations in the Biology stream of Class XII instead of Mathematics, Madhya Pradesh has held that MP Board of Secondary Education's Circular mandating the opting of the same stream as Class XI in Class XII has no retrospective application.

The court clarified that the new guidelines for the examination were issued on 28.06.2023 whereas the petitioner student had already passed her Class XI examinations by then.

“…If the facts of the case are tested on the anvil of the aforesaid dictum of the Supreme Court, it makes it more than clear that the respondents have tried to apply the Regulations issued on 28/06/2023, In such circumstances, when the aforesaid Regulation 14 itself cannot be applied in the case of the petitioner, the respondents cannot compel her to opt for Mathematics subject only with which was her subject in Class 11^th”, the single judge bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed.

Although the school records indicated that she was given admission to Class XII only on 26.07.2023, i.e., after the issuance of the circular, the court felt the date of admission was not relevant in deciding the issue. The court relied upon the date on which the student passed the Class XI examinations. The court held that the regulation cannot be made applicable to those students who have already passed their Class XI examination. About the similar regulation made applicable to Class X students as well, the court added that the same principle would apply when they had opted for a subject in Class IX and already chose another subject as their stream in Class X.

Regulation 14 issued by the Board for submitting online applications for the exam mentions about the main subjects that a student is required to choose in Class X and Class XII examinations, based on their previous choices in Class IX and Class XI respectively.

An elaborate discussion of a Division Bench decision in Assistant Excise Commissioner Kottayam & Ors. v. Esthappan Cherian & Anr, LL 2021 SC 419 also took place while the court was analysing the issue at hand. In this apex court decision, it was held that delegated legislation such as rules or regulations cannot be construed as retrospective in the absence of express statutory authorisation unless it expresses a clear or manifest intention to the contrary.

Moreover, the court added that there were reasonable doubts about the allegation levelled by the respondent authorities that the concerned student herself had already opted for Mathematics instead of Biology as the main subject in the admission form for Class XII.

“…although in her Form, on which her and her father's signature have been appended, it appears that she had opted for the Biology as her subject, on either side of which a cross ☒ and a tick have been made, whereas, in respect of Mathematics, ticks have been made on both the sides…. whereas, in the another page of the aforesaid Form, in which the important rules and conditions of the School have been given, there is a space for the signature of the student and his/her parent and both these spaces are blank…”, the bench sitting at Indore pointed out.

The court, therefore, found it difficult to believe the version of the respondent authorities that the petitioner had opted for Mathematics stream of her own volition. The court expressed its suspicion that the school authorities might have inadvertently given her admission in Biology and later resorted to some sort of 'window dressing' to correct that error.

“…In such circumstances also, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the petitioner had opted for subject Biology only at the time of taking the admission in the respondent No.6 School”, the court noted.

The court added that the circular will only have prospective application when the student has already passed the Class XI exam in 2022-23. The court, accordingly answered the two questions raised before it: i) Whether Regulations issued by the Board of Secondary Education on 28.06.2023 can be applied retrospectively, and ii) Whether the student originally opted for biology at the time of admission in the school.

“…the Guidelines issued by the respondent on 28/06/2023 shall be applicable prospectively and would not be applicable in the case of the petitioner, and secondly, the petitioner is also held to have taken admission in the respondent No.6 School in Biology stream and is entitled to appear in the examination for Class 12th for the said stream”, the court clarified while allowing the petition.

The petitioner, who is a student of Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Rau, approached the High Court, aggrieved by the inaction of the authorities on her representation to change the main subject to Biology. According to the petitioner, she became aware of such a discrepancy despite choosing Biology as the main subject, only when she was issued a dummy admit card as if she had chosen the Mathematics stream.

According to the student, she had given her choice of subjects as Physics, Chemistry and Biology at the time of filing the admission form for Class XII. She also had the highest attendance and even attended the quarterly and half-yearly exams for Biology, it was submitted on behalf of the petitioner.

Advocate Hitesh Sharma appeared for the student. Government Advocate Mukesh Parwal represented the Higher Secondary School. Advocate Chitralekha Hardia appeared for MP Board of Secondary Education and its Secretary.

Case Title: Muskan Ivnati v. The State Of Madhya Pradesh Principal Secretary Department of School Education & Ors

Case No: WRIT PETITION No. 604 of 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (MP) 26

Click Here To Read/ Download Order