Dismissed

R.Josephin Rose, v. the Chairman, Central Board

Madras HC20 Jun 2017WP(MD)/10806/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought certiorari to quash an order rejecting her daughter's request for supplementary examination after failing three subjects in Class 11. The Court found the student failed three subjects (Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics) and, totaling less than 33% aggregate, was denied promotion under Kendriya Vidyalaya rules; the petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's prayer for issuance of Writ of Certiorari and allowing supplementary examination was dismissed and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

R.Josephin Rose, Vs the Chairman, Central Board — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.06.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶6

W.P(MD) No.10806 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.8227 to 8229 of 2017

¶7

R.Josephin Rose -vs1.The Chairman, Central Board of Secondary Education, (An Autonomous Organization of Human Resources Development, Government of India), Shihdha sadan, 17, Institutional area, Rouse Avenue, Delhi – 110 002. 2.The Joint Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, IT Block, 15^th Main Road, Annanagar West, Chennai – 40. 3.The Commissioner , Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, 18, Institutional Area, New Delhi – 110 016. 4.The Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, Chennai Regional Office, IIT Campus, Chennai – 600 036. 5.The Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, Chennai Regional Office, IIT Campus, Chennai – 600 036. 6.The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ CECRI Campus, Karaikudi -6, Sivagangai District.

... Petitioner

... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in pursuance of the order passed by the 6^th respondent dated 18.04.2017 and quash the same as illegal and also direct the respondent No.3 to 6 to allow the petitioner's daughter namely Nisha Preethi Abiseha to continue her studies in the 12^th standard in the respondents No.3 to 6 School in the Academic Year 2017-2018.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy For Respondents 1 and 2 : Mr.Jayasingh For Respondents 3 to 6 : Mr.E.T.Rajendran

¶13

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for records in pursuance of the order passed by the sixth respondent dated 18.04.2017 and quash the same as illegal and also direct the respondent No.3 to 6 to allow the petitioner's daughter namely Nisha Preethi Abiseha to continue her studies in the 12^th standard in the respondents No.3 to 6 School in the Academic Year 2017-2018.

¶16

Heard Mr.S.J.Chakkaravarthy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Jayasingh, learned counsel for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.E.T.Rajendran, learned counsel for the respondents 3 to 6.

¶17

The case of the petitioner is that petitioner's daughter namely, Nisha Preethi Abiseha was studying in CBSE syllabus, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, Karaikudi since 2006. She appeared for the Central Board of Secondary 11^th standard examination during the year 2016-2017 and the results were published on 27.03.2017. It shows that the petitioner's daughter failed in three major subjects namely, Mathematics, Chemistry and Physics. On 28.03.2017, the petitioner's husband sent a representation to the third respondent for revaluation of the answer papers.

¶18

Thereafter, on 30.03.2017, the petitioner's husband sent the representation seeking permission for the appearance of supplementary examination. On 18.04.2017, by the impugned order, the respondent rejected the representation of the petitioner's husband on the ground that she has failed in three subjects. Hence, this writ petition has been filed.

¶19

Mr.E.T.Rajendran, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 3 to 6, referring to the counter filed by the sixth https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondent, would submit that as per the Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas, the students who secured overall 33% promoted to the

¶20

¶21

higher class and the students who have failed in one or two subjects are promoted to write supplementary examination, which was also incorporated in the students diary issued for 2016-2017.

¶22

It is also submitted by Mr.E.T.Rajendran, the learned

¶23

counsel appearing for the respondents 3 to 6, that on 05.12.2016, Parents and Students Meeting was conducted and in the meeting, the petitioner has also participated and it was clearly stated that the no supplementary examination will be permitted who have failed more than two subjects. The petitioner, who is signatory to the meeting, has filed this Writ Petition suppressing the material fact. The Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalayas, has clearly shown that the students secured less than 33% in one or two subjects would be allowed to take supplementary examination in those subjects.

¶24

Admittedly, the daughter of the petitioner has failed in three subjects. It is also an admitted fact that on the representation of the petitioner's husband, revaluation was conducted in which also the petitioner's daughter could not succeed in those subjects. Considering the above fact, I do not find any merit in this Writ Petition.

¶25

In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

/True Copy/

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

¶31

1.The Chairman, Central Board of Secondary Education, (An Autonomous Organization of Human Resources Development, Government of India), Shihdha sadan,

¶32

17,Institutional area, Rouse Avenue, Delhi – 110 002.

¶33

2.The Joint Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, IT Block, 15^th Main Road, Annanagar West, Chennai – 40.

¶34

3.The Commissioner , Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, 18, Institutional Area, New Delhi – 110 016.

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

¶37

4.The Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, Chennai Regional Office, IIT Campurs, Chennai – 600 036.

¶38

5.The Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, Chennai Regional Office, IIT Campus, Chennai – 600 036.

¶39

6.The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatham, CECRI Campus, Karaikudi -6, Sivagangai District.

¶40

+1cc to Mr. S.JEYASINGH Advocate in SR. No.61094 +1cc to THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER in SR. No.61472 SM/GSP JS/KKR/SAR.1/30.6.2017/4P-9C

¶41

W.P(MD) No.10806 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.8227 to 8229 of 2017

¶42

20.06.2017

¶43

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Josephin Rose, v. the Chairman, Central Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Josephin Rose, v. the Chairman, Central Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Sudhakhar Vs the President, District

R.Senthil Kumar Vs Savio Cristo Nayagam

B Veeraraghavalu Vs Vikram Kapur

S.Sarasu, W/O.Singamuthu Vs the Deputy Inspector General

Ibrahim Sha Vs the District Revenue Officer

Ponnusamy, S/O.Kutralingam, Vs the Joint Commissioner