No Board Exams For 5th And 8th Class Students In State Board: Karnataka High Court Quashes Govt Circulars

The Karnataka High Court on Friday quashed three circulars issued by the State government by which it prescribed a Board Examination for students of Standards 5 and 8th in schools affiliated to the state board.

A single judge bench of Justice Pradeep Singh Yerur, allowed the petitions filed by Organisation for Unaided Recognised Schools and the Registered Unaided Private Schools’ Management Association Karnataka and Karnataka Unaided Schools Management Association.

The bench quashed the circulars issued dated December 12, 2022, December 13, 2022 and January 4, 2023. The bench orally said “The State government can follow the procedure and do it for the next academic year.”

The petitioners had questioned the circular contending that changing the assessment method by conducting State-level ‘board exams’ instead of school-level assessment will adversely impact the students and the teachers. Further it was contended that no discussions with the stakeholders, parents, children or schools had been undertaken before issuing the circulars.

However, the state government contended that there is no Board examination. There is only a minor change in the process of assessing children and 80 percent of the total 100 marks being given to students is based on the continuous internal assessment made by the respective schools from the beginning of the academic year. It is only for the remaining 20 per cent marks for the final assessment process that question papers are prepared at the state level and evaluation of the paper is done at taluk and block levels.

The bench in its order said “It is a cardinal principle of law that when any scheme, circular or law of the government is implemented it has to evolve or emanate from the statute under which it is governed.”

Further it observed “The state government has issued the impugned circulars to prescribe certain assessment and evaluation under provisions of Right to Education (RTE) Act. State government while doing so has to necessarily follow the procedure laid down under the act.”

The court referred to Section 38 (4) of the Right of Children To Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 which mandates that “Every rule or notification made by the State Government under this Act shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before the State Legislatures.

Rejecting the submission of the state government that it has not decided to make any rule, it is only formulating certain assessments for the aid and benefit students coming under the State syllabus. Therefore the question of following the process and procedure of the Act, more specifically section 38 or any other provision of the Act won’t attract.

The bench said “I am afraid that the said contention of the AAG cannot be accepted for the reasons that by virtue of the impugned circulars there is a change which is brought about by the state government. Awarding of 20 marks for the year 2022-23 which would invariably be assessed by the board of the state.”

It added “Thereby an external agency is coming into play only for awarding 20 marks for students of class 5 and 8th. This is not contemplated under section 16 of the RTE Act. The said circulars can only supplement the Act or the Rules, but in no circumstances supplant the rules. In such a situation where the circular is issued to supplant the rules which are in the guise of rules, the prescribed procedures are to be followed as contemplated under section 38 (4) of the Act.”

Thus it held “Under the circumstances i find sufficient force in the submission put forth by respective counsel for the petitioners. As a new format for assessment/evaluation is implemented by the state government it is contrary to section 16 of the RTE Act, and procedure prescribed under the Act.”

Following which it allowed the petitions and quashed the impugned circulars.

Case Title: KARNATAKA UNAIDED SCHOOLS MANAGEMENTS ASSOCIATION And State of Karnataka

Case No: WP 5017/2023 C/w 1699/2023, 1668/2023,

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Kar) 103

Appearance: Advocates DHANANJAY K V, A Velan, Pawan Shyam, Anirudh A Kulkarni, Narayan Babu D N, Sudharsan Suresh for petitioners.

AAG Dhyan Chinnappa for respondent.