PAVNI ALAGH (MINOR) vs CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION & ANR.

$~218
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 4379/2024
PAVNI ALAGH (MINOR) ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sahil Mongia, Adv.

Versus

CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY
EDUCATION & ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Sanjay Khanna, Adv.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R (ORAL)
% 21.03.2024

CM APPL. 17934/2024 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 4379/2024 and CM APPL. 17933/2024 (direction)

3. Issue notice in the writ petition to show cause as to why rule nisi be not issued and issue notice in CM 17933/2024.
4. Notice is accepted on behalf of the respondents by Mr. Sanjay Khanna.
5. Counter affidavit to the writ petition and reply to the application, if any, be filed within a period of three weeks with advance copy to learned Counsel for the petitioner, who may file rejoinders thereto, if any, within a period of two weeks thereof.
6. Mr. Mongia, learned Counsel for the petitioner places reliance on an order dated 18 March 2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Sara Sharma v. Central Board of Secondary Education & Ors. (LPA 203/2024). LPA 203/2024 is next listed tomorrow.
7. This case involves the same issue which has come up before this Bench on numerous earlier occasions, which relates to a female candidate, who sought to appear in Class X or Class XII board exams conducted by the CBSE as a private candidate.
8. Notice dated 5 September 2023 issued by the CBSE relating to submission of examination forms, which required the candidates inter alia to upload a copy of the Domicile Certificate issued by the appropriate authority when submitting the online application form.
9. This Court has been inundated with petitions of female private candidates attempting Class X and Class XII examinations, who did not upload the Domicile Certificate along with the application forms. In some such cases, the Court was also informed that this requirement was introduced for the first time this year and that, therefore, the candidates were bona fide not aware that they had to obtain the Domicile Certificate in certain cases after uploading the application forms. After uploading the application form, however, an application for obtaining the Domicile Certificate was submitted, and the Domicile Certificate was obtained. This Court has been allowing such candidates to appear in the examinations though in most cases admit cards had already been issued to the candidates.
10. The first of these cases was in the case of Vishakha v. CBSE1, in which no Domicile Certificate had been obtained by the candidates at all. In those circumstances, this Court had held that it was not possible to permit the candidates to write the examinations without any Domicile Certificate and had, therefore, dismissed the writ petition. That decision was carried to the Division Bench and upheld by the Division Bench by judgment dated 22 February 2024 in LPA 149/2024.
11. One other petition, decided by this Bench in the case of Sara Sharma v. CBSE, has also been carried to the Division Bench in LPA 203/2024. In that case, on 18 March 2024, the Division Bench has passed the following order.
“1. The learned Single Judge, in the impugned order, has observed that the students who were not in possession of the Domicile Certificate, at least, on the date when the admit cards were issued, would not be entitled to any relief. However, learned counsel for the CBSE states that benefit has been granted to students who had furnished Domicile Certificates even after issuance of admit cards provided the Domicile Certificate had been furnished up to 14th February, 2024.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the CBSE has allowed students to sit in the Board Examinations who had obtained Domicile Certificates as late as 19th February, 2024 i.e. much after issuance of admit cards and commencement of examination.

3. Let the appellant file an affidavit giving the particulars of students within two days.

4. The CBSE shall also place on record its stand within three days.

5. List on 22nd March, 2024.”
12. As is apparent from the afore-extracted order dated 18 March 2024, the CBSE made a statement before the Division Bench that they were permitting candidates, who furnished the Domicile Certificate upto 14 February 2024, to attempt the examinations. I have queried of Mr. Sanjay Khanna as to the sanctity of date of 14 February 2024. The justifiability of fixing such an artificial date by the CBSE on the basis of which to decide to permit, or to permit the candidates to attempt the board examinations is, according to me, seriously questionable.
13. Mr. Khanna submits that one possible reason why the date of 14 February 2024 was adopted, was possibly that the CBSE Board examinations were to commence on 15 February 2024. That, too, in my view, may not constitute a sufficient ground for adopting the date of 14 February 2024. What happens if two candidates have applied for the Domicile Certificate shortly after uploading their application forms, but one happens to get the Domicile Certificate on 13 February 2024 and the other on 15 February 2024? Is it open to the CBSE to allow the first candidate to attempt the papers and deny the right to the second candidate when the cut-off date of 14 February 2024, adopted by the CBSE, is not to be found in any statutory stipulation or any administrative guidelines?
14. These, however, are issues which are at large before the Division Bench in LPA 203/2024 and it would be unseemly for me, therefore, to express any view in that regard.
15. The order dated 18 March 2024 in LPA 203/2024 notes the contention of the appellant before the Division Bench that the CBSE allowed students who had obtained the Domicile Certificates as late as on 19 February 2024, to sit in the board examinations. Though the CBSE was represented before the Division Bench on 18 March 2024, it does not appear that this submission, made by learned Counsel for the appellant in that case before the Division Bench, was controverted or denied.
16. Though Mr. Khanna refutes the said contention before me, the order 18 March 2024 indicates that no such objection was raised before the Division Bench.
17. The petitioner also happens to have obtained the Domicile Certificate on 19 February 2024.
18. In view of the aforesaid, keeping in view the principles of prima facie case of balance of convenience and irreparable loss, I deem it appropriate to allow the petitioner to undertake the remaining papers of Class XII on producing the Domicile Certificate before the CBSE.
19. Mr. Khanna had sought to submit that in case of Priyanka Darshi v. CBSE2, the petitioner Priyanka Darshi, who had also obtained the Domicile Certificate on 13 February 2024, had not been allowed, by this Court, to attempt the examinations. Much water has, however, flown under the bridge after the order passed in Priyanka Darshi. This issue has, since, come up before the Division Bench twice. The CBSE has itself made a statement, before the Division Bench, that it was allowing candidates who had obtained the Domicile Certificate on or before 14 February 2024 to appear in the examinations.
20. Keeping in view the order passed on 18 March 2024 by the Division Bench in Sara Sharma, no prejudice would be caused to the CBSE if the petitioner is allowed, pending disposal of the present writ petition and subject to the outcome thereof, to undertake the examinations. The interests of justice would merit grant of ad interim relief at least to that extent at this stage.
21. As such, the petitioner is permitted to appear in her remaining papers of Class XII on her providing the Domicile Certificate to the CBSE at the entrance hall.
22. Renotify on 7 May 2024.
23. Mr. Khanna undertakes to inform the CBSE of the order passed today.
C.HARI SHANKAR, J
MARCH 21, 2024
rb
Click here to check corrigendum, if any
1 2024 SCC OnLine Del 1087
2 MANU/DE/1195/2024
—————

————————————————————

—————

————————————————————

W.P.(C) 4379/2024 Page 1 of 7