Karnataka High Court reserves judgment on Board Exams for classes 5, 8, 9, 11

A division bench of the Karnataka High Court on Monday reserved its judgment on an appeal filed by the Karnataka government against a single-judge's decision to halt the conduct of board exams for students of classes 5, 8, 9 and 11 in State-affiliated schools. .A bench of Justices K Somashekar and Rajesh Rai K reserved its verdict this evening on the appeal against a March 6 judgment by a single-judge of the High Court. .In its March 6 judgment, the single-judge had allowed writ petitions filed by private unaided schools in Karnataka that had challenged the conduct of the board exams. The single-judge set aside two State notifications that had paved way to the conduct of these exams by the Karnataka State Education Assessment Board (KSEAB).The decision was promptly challenged by the State before a division bench of the High Court..On March 7, the division bench stayed the single-judge order. As a result the KSEAB exams commenced as scheduled on March 11. A day later, on March 12, the Supreme Court stayed the division bench order and put the exams on hold. The top court further ordered the division bench of the High Court to deal with matter on merits. Detailed arguments before the High Court's division bench then commenced on March 14, when the bench declined to refer the matter to a larger bench despite a request to do so by the counsel representing a parent-student association. .Highlights of arguments.The State's arguments were led by Additional Advocate General (AAG) Vikram Huilgol who, among other submissions, asserted that there was no prohibition on conducting board exams for students in classes 5,8, 9 or 11. Section 30 (no child shall be required to pass any board examination till completion of elementary education) of the Right to Education Act (RTE Act) only lays down that no student is required to "pass" a board exam, he explained. "There is no prohibition on board exams in Section 16 (RTE Act). Legislature specifically says there is no requirement to 'pass' any Board Exam. It recognises that there may be need to hold a board exam," he added. In the final submissions made today, the AAG further argued that the exams in question should not be viewed as the same as board exams conducted for 10th standard or 12th standard students. Rather, he pointed out that it was only that the KSEAB is setting the paper for the second summative assessment (SA2) of students in classes 5, 8, 9 and 11. This was part of their continuous assessment, he said.He added that these exams are not standalone assessments taken in separate exam centers. Rather, they are taken by the students in their own classroom. The only difference is that the KSEB is setting the paper to keep a check on whether any corrective measures were required if any school underperforms. There is neither any question of detaining a child nor is there any tinkering with the syllabus already followed by the students, he argued. There is also no separate enrollment process or exam fee charged, he said. He further reiterated that there were no need to notify any rules under Section 145 of the Karnataka Education Act to hold these exams. .The arguments for the original writ petitioners (private unaided schools who were respondents in the appeal) were led by advocate KV Dhananjay who maintained that Section 30 of the RTE Act involves a bar on subjecting any young child to board exams. He contended that the Court should not narrowly or literally construe this provision only because the term "pass" is used. "The only reasonable interpretation is Parliament disapproves subjecting young children to Board Examination (it is not about passing or failing them). Please don't give literal meaning to the term 'pass' in Section 30, RTE Act," Dhananjay submitted. He asserted that the State was mandatorily required to notify rules under Section 145 of the Karnataka Education Act, which should also be laid before the legislature after receiving the views of teachers, parents, etc. He challenged the State's stance that it could simply notify these exams under Section 22 of the Karnataka Education Act, without framing any rules. He argued that such an interpretation would amount to conferring the State with excessive delegated legislation powers..Meanwhile advocate A Velan appeared for a parent-student association and made detailed arguments on why parents of students should have been before notifying these exams. He argued that the rights of parents have been violated by the State's actions. "My contention is, devoid of any consultative process (with parents), it (notifications for board exams) is void ab initio. Parental right to be consulted is relatable to due process, which is a fundamental right," Velan submitted. .Advocate Prithveesh MK appeared for an intervenor who supported the State's stance. As the hearings wrapped up, he echoed the State's submission that there was no change of syllabus involved and that all that was being done with the KSEAB exams, was standardisation in the conduct of the exams.