Holding that the court cannot poke its nose into a policy decision taken by the government, the Madras High Court on Tuesday dismissed a batch of writ petitions filed by Class 10 students challenging the methodology adopted by the State government to award marks for board examination that was cancelled this year owing to the pandemic.
Chennai: Pointing out that it was settled law that the courts could interfere into the policy decision only when it suffers from arbitrariness, irrationality, bias or malice, Justice N Anand Venkatesh said policy decision should be left within the domain of governance. “The courts must be very slow to interfere with such decisions. If the court is satisfied that the decision taken by the government is not arbitrary, irrational or is not actuated by bias or malice, it should not poke its nose to a policy decision taken by the government,” he said.
While adopting any method, the government has to take into consideration the overall interest of the students. When doing so, it was possible that some students are unsatisfied with the methodology, or that there are some alternative or effective method to award marks. However, the judge added, “that by itself cannot be a ground to interfere with the decision taken by the government”.
As per the methodology adopted, 80 per cent marks were awarded on the basis of the marks secured by students in the quarterly and half-yearly examinations, while the remaining given on the basis of attendance.
Challenging this, senior counsel TP Manoharan appearing for the students contended that the marks secured by the students in the final revision test should have been considered as the final marks instead of merely confining it up to half-yearly examination.
The advocate had argued that marks scored in Class 10 would have a very serious impact on the future of students, as these marks would be taken into account for admission to the Class 11 and for getting the desired groups, and even during the future education in colleges and employment.
However, special government pleader C Munusamy submitted that if the court interfered with the GO at this stage, it would have a cascading effect. In the present circumstance, reversing the entire process was almost impossible, he added.
While adopting any method, the government has to take into consideration the overall interest of the students. When doing so, it was possible that some students are unsatisfied with the methodology, or that there are some alternative or effective method to award marks. However, the judge added, “that by itself cannot be a ground to interfere with the decision taken by the government”.
As per the methodology adopted, 80 per cent marks were awarded on the basis of the marks secured by students in the quarterly and half-yearly examinations, while the remaining given on the basis of attendance.
Challenging this, senior counsel TP Manoharan appearing for the students contended that the marks secured by the students in the final revision test should have been considered as the final marks instead of merely confining it up to half-yearly examination.
The advocate had argued that marks scored in Class 10 would have a very serious impact on the future of students, as these marks would be taken into account for admission to the Class 11 and for getting the desired groups, and even during the future education in colleges and employment.
However, special government pleader C Munusamy submitted that if the court interfered with the GO at this stage, it would have a cascading effect. In the present circumstance, reversing the entire process was almost impossible, he added.