VEENA PATIL Vs. DIRECTOR, KARNATAKA HIGHER EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, petitioner/student is challenging the order dated 03.05.2013 passed by the Director, Karnataka Secondary Education Board, Bangalore. By the said order, the Director has rejected the request made by the petitioner to condone the deficiency in attendance of the petitioner for S.S.L.C. classes and to permit him to take the examination conducted during the month of April -2013.

(2.) AS could be seen from the impugne d order produced at Annexure 'E', petitioner/student has got only 26.47% of attendance as against the required 75% of attendance in terms of Rule 37 of Sub -clause (2)(1) of the Karnataka Secondary Education Examination Board, First Regulations, 1966 [for short 'the Regulations'].

(3.) SUB -clause (3) of Rule 37 of the Regulations provides that, the Board may in respect of a candidate or class of candidates condone the deficiency of attendance either by general or special order, upto such percentage of working days as the Board may decide after considering the circumstances of any case and for the reasons to be recorded in writing. The power conferred under Sub -clause (3) is not regulated or controlled by the power given under Sub -clause (2) of the Regulations, as it is apparent that sub -clause (3) starts with a non - obstante clause. Therefore, it follows that in respect of any candidate or class of candidates, the Board may condone any deficiency of attendance as it may decide after considering the circumstances of any case and for the reasons to be recorded in writing.