$~12 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Decided on: 11^th April, 2023 + W.P.(C) 4519/2019 ANUSHKA SHARMA (MINOR) THROUGH HER NEXT FRIEND AND NATURAL FATHER, SH. JITENDER KUMAR SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashok Agarwal, Mr.

Kumar Utkarsh, Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocates (M:9811101923)

versus CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION (CBSE) AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Khanna, Ms. Pragya Bhushan, Mr. Karandeep Singh, Mr. Tarandeep Singh, Mr. Amit Singh, Advocates for CBSE (M:9899305640)

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA [Physical Hearing/ Hybrid Hearing]

MINI PUSHKARNA, J. (ORAL):

1. The present writ petition has been filed with prayer for directions to the Central Board of Secondary Examination (CBSE) to re-evaluate and rectify the mathematics subject answer book of the petitioner of Class X boards as conducted by the CBSE in the year 2018. There is further prayer for setting aside the notice dated 31.05.2018 issued by the CBSE laying down the modalities and schedule in respect of process of verification and re-evaluation of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PURAN W.P.(C) 4519/2019 Page 1 of 10 answer books for the candidates who had appeared under the CBSE Class 10^th and Class 12^th examination for the year 2018.

2. As per the facts as given in the petition, the petitioner appeared in Class 10^th Board examinations conducted by the CBSE in the year 2018. The petitioner was extremely shocked and disappointed to see the marks awarded to her in mathematics subject. She was awarded 80 marks out of total of 100 marks, which were far below her expectation.

3. Subsequently, the petitioner’s father subsequently duly applied for the verification of his daughter’s marks in mathematics. Through the online status update on the website of CBSE, the petitioner came to know that no mistakes were found in the marks awarded to her in mathematics.

4. It is submitted that the petitioner and her father bonafidely believed that the process of verification of marks included thorough re-examination of marks awarded in an answer book as per prescribed marking scheme. Therefore, on learning that no mistakes were found in the verification process, they did not apply for the photocopy of the evaluated answer book as per the prescribed time schedule set out by the CBSE.

5. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that it is only subsequently that the petitioner and her father came to know about the restricted scope of process of verification of marks. It is submitted that the process of verification of marks only entailed re-totaling of marks already awarded by the examiner on the answer book. The said verification did not include verification of marks awarded in answer Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PURAN W.P.(C) 4519/2019 Page 2 of 10 book with the prescribed marking scheme supplied by the respondents for the purpose of identifying under/over-evaluation.

6. It is submitted that respondent no. 2 accepted online applications for re-evaluation from 21.06.2018 to 22.06.2018 only, from the candidates who had procured the photocopy of the evaluated answer books as per the schedule prescribed for the same. Since the petitioner was unable to procure the photocopy of the answer book of mathematics examination within the stipulated time frame, she was unable to apply/request for re-evaluation from 21.06.2018 to

22.06.2018.

7. Thereafter, petitioner’s father through an RTI application dated 01.07.2018 requested for supply of photocopy of the answer book of petitioner’s class X mathematics subject examination. The same was supplied by the CBSE vide letter dated 08.08.2018. It is submitted that immediately thereafter, petitioner’s father compared the photocopy of the petitioner’s answer book with the marking scheme of mathematics as available on the website of respondent no. 1. It is submitted that serious errors in evaluation were found and that in the evaluation of majority of questions, despite being correctly answered