Gujarat HC directs state education board to clearly specify questions meant for visually impaired students in Class 10, 12 exams
Justice Nikhil S Kariel, in the order issued on the writ petition on July 7, observed, 'The marks of 10th standard examination, though very important to a student, would not be the criteria for any future admission (except for standard 11) or any future employment. After the 10th board results were released and the students, including the petitioner, had joined new academic courses, it would not be in the larger public interest to interfere in the present petition.'
The petitioner Mohammed Afzal Shaikh, on behalf of his daughter Aasiyabanu Shaikh, who studies at a private school in Surat, said the girl had appeared for her Class 10 exams in March this year, in which she opted for Basic Mathematics. She cleared the exams with a B1 grade. In Basic Mathematics, she scored 59 out of 80 marks and an overall 77 out of 100 marks.
The petition states that after getting the Basic Mathematics examination paper, Aasiyabanu was confused as questions also appeared in sections B and C, which contained sections for visually impaired students. Each question carried 2 to 4 marks. She complained about this to her father.
Following this, Shaikh filed a writ petition with the Gujarat High Court challenging the actions, arbitrary and negligent conduct of the State Board for having ambiguous information in the question paper, causing significant confusion among students.
Aasiyabanu, the plea said, inadvertently answered questions meant specifically for visually impaired (blind) students, relying solely on her general understanding. Several other students too were misled and answered questions intended for visually impaired students. Despite Aasiyabanu's father submitting a detailed representation and a subsequent application under the Right to Information Act (RTI), there was no positive response.
In the petition, Shaikh had sought directions to the respondents to re-evaluate Aasiyabanu's Basic Mathematics answer sheet, taking into account the confusion caused due to the defective question paper and appropriately revise the results.
The petitioner's lawyer Dr Rafik Lokhandwala, in his representations to the court, said the issue occurred in part-B of the question paper. The same issue had occurred in the Class 12 question paper, he said.
Public Prosecutor Aditya Pathak argued that the petitioner is presently studying in Class 11 in the Commerce stream and it is not the case that the petitioner, due to lack of marks, could not get appropriate admission to some other stream.
Taking the arguments into consideration, the court observed, 'The petitioner had not suffered any real substantial prejudice on account of the error which may have been committed by the respondent Board. While the petitioner may have a case against the respondent Board, public interest and equity demand that there should not be any interference in the present petition.'
'The list of instructions contained in the question paper does not specify whether the questions preceding or following the instructions are for visually impaired students. Thus, a reasonable doubt would be caused in anyone's mind, more particularly a student appearing in the 10th standard examination, as to whether the instructions would be relatable to the preceding questions or later questions,' it added.
Issuing a direction to the Board, the court said it has to 'ensure that for examinations held in future, both for standard 10th and 12th, the list of instructions preceding the actual questions shall specifically state that the questions are only to be attended by the visually impaired students. Furthermore, the general instructions in the body of the question paper shall also specifically mention the question numbers which are for the students having visual impairment.'
Speaking to The Indian Express, B N Rajgor, Joint Director, GSHSEB, said, 'Generally, we set a common Board examination paper for visually impaired and general students. This time, the instructions were in the middle, and the questions appeared after the instructions for visually impaired students. Now, we will give more clarity in our Board examination papers.'
Aasiyabanu's father, Afzal Shaikh, said, 'Now the mistake of the Board will be rectified in future board exams of Class 10 and 12, after the court's order. My act will benefit lakhs of students appearing in future Board exams.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
33 minutes ago
- The Hindu
RTI activist questions latest order on re-employment of retirees issued by Department of Higher Education
The latest order by the Department of Higher Education permitting re-employment of Joint Director, Regional Joint Director, Principals in Grade I and II, College Librarians, and Directors of Physical Education who are engaged in administrative nature of job, after attainment of superannuation, has been questioned by an RTI activist in Coimbatore. In the Government Order 192 dated November 12, 2024, the re-employment for these posts were dispensed with, on the last day of the month of attaining the age of superannuation. The latest order issued on July 31 was based on the request of the Commissioner of Collegiate Education for permitting their re-employment. In a petition submitted to the Principal Secretary, Department of Higher Education, RTI activist and former Associate Professor and Head, Department of Mathematics, CBM College, Coimbatore, N.R. Ravisankar, said the re-employment order of the Higher Education Department ran counter to the amendment made to the Government Order 92. It states that every government servant in the superior as well as basic service shall retire from service on the afternoon of the last day of the month of attainment of 60 years. They shall not be retained in service after that age. 'The Amendment is clear that those attaining the age of 60 years on superannuation cannot continue further. How then is it possible for the Higher Education Department to issue the G.O. on reemployment which is applicable to the posts in the government-aided colleges as well. Citing an instance of the directive given to a government-aided college in Coimbatore to appoint a new Principal by cancelling the re-employment of the existing principal based on the retirement age of 60 years, Prof. Ravichandran said the latest G.O. of the Higher Education Department on re-employment has to be withdrawn.
Hans India
9 hours ago
- Hans India
Eyewitness Files Complaint Over Illegal Burial Practices As Police Records Destruction Sparks Mass Burial Investigation
Fresh controversy has erupted in Karnataka's Belthangady district following startling revelations about the systematic destruction of police death records and new eyewitness testimony of illegal burial practices. An RTI activist has now filed a formal complaint with the Special Investigation Team, claiming to have personally witnessed the improper burial of a young girl's body, describing the incident as treating her remains "like one would bury a dog." The development comes after Right to Information documents revealed that Belthangady police deliberately deleted all entries from their Unnatural Death Register covering the period from 2000 to 2015. This timeframe coincides directly with allegations of mass burials in the temple town of Dharmasthala, located within the same administrative jurisdiction. RTI activist Jayanth, who has been investigating police conduct for years, submitted his complaint to the SIT on August 2nd. He claims to have witnessed the illegal burial firsthand and has named all officials who were present during the incident. According to Jayanth, proper legal procedures were completely ignored when the young girl's body was discovered and buried. The activist explained that his decision to come forward was motivated by the appointment of what he considers honest officers to the investigation. He stated that the disturbing scene had haunted him for years, and he had previously promised to reveal the truth once trustworthy investigators took charge of the case. In his earlier RTI requests to Belthangady Police Station, Jayanth had sought records of missing persons complaints along with accompanying photographs. The police response was deeply concerning - they claimed that all such documentation, including postmortem reports, wall posters, notices, and photographs used to identify unidentified bodies, had been destroyed under routine administrative procedures. The activist has raised critical questions about the destruction of such vital records in the digital age. He argues that in today's technological environment, it is inconceivable that such important data would be destroyed without first being digitized and backed up. This raises serious concerns about who might be influencing such decisions and what they might be trying to conceal. The implications of this record destruction are particularly troubling when considering future identification efforts. If skeletal remains are discovered, authorities would be unable to match them against any existing records since the relevant documentation has been eliminated. This systematic erasure of evidence suggests a deliberate attempt to obstruct potential investigations. The Belthangady Police's admission of destroying crucial records has intensified scrutiny of their handling of unidentified death cases. The destroyed documents covered the exact period during which a whistleblower has alleged that mass burials occurred in Dharmasthala. According to these allegations, between 1998 and 2014, the whistleblower was forced to bury and cremate bodies of women and minors, many of whom allegedly showed signs of sexual assault. The police's justification for destroying these records as part of "routine administrative orders" has been met with skepticism and outrage. Critics argue that such sensitive documentation should be preserved indefinitely, particularly given the serious nature of unidentified death cases and the potential for future investigations. The SIT is expected to register a formal FIR based on Jayanth's complaint and may soon initiate exhumation proceedings to investigate the alleged illegal burials. This development marks a significant escalation in what has become one of Karnataka's most controversial cases involving alleged systematic cover-ups and destruction of evidence. The case has broader implications for police accountability and record-keeping practices across the state. It raises fundamental questions about how law enforcement agencies handle sensitive cases involving unidentified deaths and what safeguards exist to prevent the destruction of crucial evidence. As the investigation proceeds, public attention remains focused on whether authorities will be able to uncover the truth despite the systematic destruction of records. The case highlights the critical importance of RTI activism in exposing potential misconduct and the need for transparent, accountable policing practices in handling sensitive criminal matters.
India Today
9 hours ago
- India Today
They buried her like a dog: New testimonies in Dharmasthala mass burial case
Shocking revelations in Karnataka's Belthangady have reignited public outrage over alleged mass burials, following India Today's exclusive report on the systematic deletion of police records. Right to Information (RTI) documents accessed by India Today show that Belthangady police deleted all entries from the Unnatural Death Register (UDR) between 2000 and 2015, a period that coincides with multiple allegations of unreported and suspicious RTI activist Jayanth has filed a formal complaint with the Special Investigation Team (SIT), claiming to have witnessed the illegal burial of a young girl's body. He alleges that legal protocols were blatantly violated and that several officials were present at the time. The SIT is expected to register an FIR and begin exhumation proceedings who has long used RTI to probe police conduct, said he had earlier requested missing persons data and photographs from the Belthangady Police Station. The police response was chilling: they claimed all such documents, postmortem reports, wall posters, notices, and photographs used to trace unidentified bodies, had been destroyed under "routine administrative orders." Jayanth said, "On August 2, I filed a complaint with the SIT. This complaint is based on an incident I personally witnessed. I named everyone who was present at that time, including officers. When the girl's body was found, all legal procedures were violated. They buried the body like one would bury a dog. That sight has haunted me for years. Two years ago, I had said I would reveal the truth if honest officers ever took over the investigation. Now that moment has come, so I've filed this complaint. No one is behind me or influencing me to do this.""As an RTI activist, I had filed a requisition at the Belthangady Police Station asking for records of all missing persons complaints along with photographs. But in their reply, police claimed that the missing complaint records were destroyed. In today's digital age, how can such data be destroyed without digitising it first?"He added, "If skeletal remains are found, how will the government match them to anyone when they've destroyed the relevant documents? Who are the people behind this? Who is influencing and covering this up? When there are computerised backups, how can they claim to have destroyed everything without backing it up? All of this must be investigated thoroughly."The Belthangady Police in Karnataka's Dakshina Kannada district have come under sharp criticism after admitting to destroying key records of unidentified death cases registered between 2000 and 2015, a timeframe that overlaps almost entirely with the period during which a whistleblower has alleged mass burials took place in Dharmasthala, a temple town located within the same fresh complaintIn response to a Right to Information (RTI) application, the police stated that postmortem reports, wall posters, notices, and photographs used in efforts to trace the identity of deceased individuals had been destroyed in accordance with routine administrative erasure of these records has triggered deep concern, as the whistleblower claims that between 1998 and 2014, he was forced to bury and cremate the bodies of women and minors, many of whom, he alleges, bore signs of sexual assault.- Ends
