Board Exams Of 5 & 8 Class, Plea Filed Against MP Govt Decision In SC

A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court on Wednesday challenging the Madhya Pradesh government’s 2022 circular directing private schools to conduct final examinations for students in classes 5 to 8 in the format of board examinations using the State Council of Educational Research and Training (SCERT) syllabus.

CJI DY Chandrachud, who heard the case on Wednesday, ordered that the matter be posted with another pending petition in Karnataka involving a similar issue.

Ashaskiya Vidyalaya Pariwar, a registered society in Madhya Pradesh, and its president, one Mohandas Nagwani, filed the plea through counsel Shwetank Sailakwal and advocate Areeb Uddin Ahmed. It aims to overturn a state high court division bench’s decision of an appeal against a single judge authorizing board examinations in classes five and eight at government, government-affiliated private, and aided schools.

The petition emphasized that the Right to Education Act clearly specifies that no student shall be obliged to pass a board examination until they have completed elementary education.

“The said circular not only defeats the objective of the provisions of the RTE Act but also misinterprets the amendment brought by the Respondent No.1,” the plea filed by a registered society stated.

In this regard, the petition emphasized the Act’s definition of “elementary education,” which covers classes 1 to 8.

Earlier, the High Court’s single-judge and division bench rejected petitions challenging the circular. The High Court, on the other hand, ordered the respondents to hold examinations in accordance with the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) syllabus.

The petition filed before the Supreme Court stated that on account of a clear statutory provision under the Act, an executive instruction cannot be issued contrary to it.

“Legislative functions cannot be delegated without following the test of legislative sanctions, and legislative mandates cannot be introduced through administrative circulars or subordinate delegated legislation,” it was submitted.

To support this submission, the Supreme Court decided in the case of Ashok Lanka v Rishi Dixit that there can be no doubt that subordinate legislation must be framed strictly in accordance with the legislative intent as reflected in the rule-making power.

“The High Court should have considered that the circular/order was an executive instruction that could never be allowed to exist if the same de-hors the act. As a result, the entire ruling, not only the section concerning the curriculum, was susceptible to be quashed,” the petitioners submitted.

The petitioners further argued that the circular contradicts the Act’s intent and puts students in trouble and emotional distress, thus impacting their performance in upcoming exams.

As a result, the petitioners also requested a stay of the High Court’s verdict as well as the circular itself.