ZAHIDA KHATOON ABDUL KAIYOOM Vs. THE PRINCIPAL, ANJUMAN I ISLAMS BEGUM KAMILA HAJI ABDUL HAQ COLLEGE OF HOME SCIENCE & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition challenges the cancellation of the petitioner's result of the Class XII (Science) examination held in the month of February 2020 by the respondent no.2 Board. Therespondent no.1 is the institution where she was enrolled. The cancellation has occasioned as a result of Rule no.92(6)(i) forming part of the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations ("the Regulations"). The Regulations permits a student to attempt improvement of marks secured at a previous examination by making two further attempts. In the present case, the petitioner had appeared for and succeeded in her first attempt during 2017- 2018. Being desirous of pursuing a career in medicine, unable to secure the required score, she opted for the Class Improvement Scheme under the said Regulations. She made a second attempt in February 2019 but she once again did not secure the requisite number of marks. Under the scheme two consecutive attempts are said to be permissible after the initial attempt. In other words, three attempts may be made by a student but at consecutive examinations. A controversy has now arisen results from cancellation of the result of the examination held in February 2020 since it was beyond the period of one year which the Board prescribes.

(2.) The petitioner filed Writ Petition (L)no.5333 of 2020 which came up for admission on 2nd November, 2020. At the hearing of that petition, the respondent no.2 Board presented a compilation of documents which contained a communication dated 4th September, 2020 (incorrectly recorded as 4 th October, 2020 in the order dated 2nd November, 2020) which is addressed by respondent no.2 to the respondent no.1 school. It is a Show Cause Notice for having permitted the petitioner- student to appear for the examination beyond the period prescribed under the said Rules. The petitioner therefore withdrew that petition with a liberty to file the fresh petition challenging the communication dated 4 th September, 2020. This is that petition.

(3.) Being a petition filed on the Original Side, it was listed before the appropriate bench per the extant vacation assignment but owing to inability of that bench to take up the matter, it came to be listed before this Court. We heard this matter yesterday when the petitioner's counsel sought leave to implead the National Testing Agency as respondent no.4. Having permitted the amendment, the respondent no.4 is today represented before us. The petitioner has sought urgent reliefs in terms of prayer clause (e) of the petition which reads thus; "(e) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the above petition, this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to 3 and 4 to allow the petitioner to register for the counseling sessions of the NEET 2020 exam."