MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

CBSE Bye-Laws Prevail in School Promotion Criteria, Declares Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Delhi High Court affirmed the supremacy of the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) Examination Bye-Laws over the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) Education Code. The decision, delivered on November 6, 2023, by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani, has paved the way for a Class XI student to be promoted to Class XII despite failing Mathematics, a main subject, by substituting the marks with those obtained in Physical Education, an additional subject.

The court observed that "the decision of the matter turns on the interpretation of two provisions, viz. (i) Bye-Law 40.1, more specifically Bye-Law 40.1 clauses (iv) and (vi) of the CBSE Examination Bye-Laws; and (ii) Article 106 of the KVS Education Code." It was concluded that the CBSE bye-laws must prevail, ensuring uniformity and fairness in the academic progression criteria applied to students.

Justice Bhambhani noted, "once KVS has sought and obtained affiliation to the CBSE inter-alia for Class-XI and Class-XII, KVS cannot impose on its students pass criteria for Class-XI which are in the teeth of specific pass criteria laid down by the CBSE vide Bye-Law 40.1." This clarification has brought clarity to the applicable rules governing student promotions within the education system.

The petitioner, represented by advocates Ms. Pooja Dhar and Ms. S. Ambica, successfully argued that the respondent school was bound by the CBSE Examination Bye-Laws and was, therefore, required to adopt the 'pass criteria' prescribed therein. The court's decision underscores the binding nature of the CBSE's regulations on all affiliated institutions, including those under the KVS.

The ruling also highlighted the court's role in judicial review, especially in matters of educational policy, with the court affirming that "the bye-laws of the Board have the force of law and must be regarded as such for all legal purposes."

This decision has significant implications for educational institutions affiliated with the CBSE, reaffirming the Board's autonomous status and the enforceability of its regulations. It ensures that students' rights to fair evaluation and promotion are upheld, setting a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Date of Decision: 06 November 2023

ARYAN KUMAR (MINOR) THROUGH FATHER RAVINDER KUMAR VS KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA & ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Del-06-Nov-2023-Aryan-Kumar-Vs-KV-Vidalya.pdf"]

Latest Legal News