"Supreme Court Warns Karnataka Govt: No Board Exams for Classes 5, 8 & 9 Against Court Order"

The Supreme Court today (September 30) allowed petitioners to file a contempt application against the Karnataka Government for planning to conduct Board Exams for Classes 5, 8, and 9, despite the Court's previous order. A bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma was informed that the Karnataka Government had issued notifications in three rural districts to hold these exams, with question papers set by the administrative office. Advocate KV Dhananjay, representing the petitioners, reminded the Court that an interim order had been issued in their favor, stopping the government from conducting Board Exams for these classes. The proposal to move ahead with such exams would go against the court's ruling. Justice Bela warned, "You shall not do anything that defies the court's order. Strict action will be taken." The Court allowed the petitioners to file a contempt application, with the matter set to be heard next week. Background of the Case: On March 12, the Supreme Court had issued an interim order, halting the Karnataka Government's plan to hold Board Exams for Classes 5, 8, and 9 in State Board-affiliated schools. The Court instructed the High Court's division bench to quickly resolve the main appeals, filed by the Karnataka State Government, without being influenced by the Supreme Court's observations. The Supreme Court, responding to appeals from private school associations and parents, set aside a March 7 order by the Karnataka High Court's division bench that had stayed a previous ruling by a single judge, who had quashed the Government's decision to hold Board Exams. Later, on March 22, the division bench of the High Court upheld the Karnataka Government's decision to conduct the exams. However, on April 8, the Supreme Court stayed the results of these exams and the High Court's March 22 ruling. Background: The issue began when the Karnataka government issued two notifications appointing the Karnataka School Examination & Assessment Board (KSEAB) to conduct the "Summative Assessment-2" exams for students in Classes 5, 8, and 9, and the annual exams for Class 11 in government, aided, and unaided schools following the State Board syllabus. It was argued that the "Summative Assessment-2" was very similar to a board exam, like those conducted by CBSE or ICSE for 10th standard students, which goes against the Right to Education (RTE) Act. This decision was challenged in the Karnataka High Court. A single judge, Justice Ravi V Hosmani, overturned the government notifications. He stated that when the government plans to change the exam system for such a large number of students, it must follow the proper democratic process. If this process is not followed, the changes can be rejected, regardless of their intended policy or purpose. The court also ruled that the government had failed to justify the notifications as compliant with Section 145 (4) of the Education Act, making them unsustainable. However, when the Karnataka government appealed to a division bench, the single judge's ruling was stayed. In response, private school associations and parents filed special leave petitions in the Supreme Court, challenging the division bench's order. Arguments Before the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court, without delving into the merits of the case, stated that the Karnataka Government's notifications appeared to violate Section 30 of the RTE Act, complicating the education policy and affecting students' careers. The Court noted that since the High Court's single judge had already set aside the notifications, the Division Bench should not have allowed the exams to proceed. Petitioners argued that the state had only obtained an interim order from the Division Bench, and that the RTE Act does not allow Board exams for Classes 5, 8, and 9, even if students are not failed. The state countered, claiming these were "summative assessments" to prepare students for future Board exams, but the Court disagreed, stating that calling them "assessments" didn't change the fact that they were conducted by the Board. The state also argued that students didn’t need to "pass" the exams, but when it admitted that assessment marks counted toward final exams, the Court indicated this conflicted with legal provisions, citing Section 30 of the RTE Act, which prohibits Board exams before the completion of elementary education. Lastly, the state claimed that school performance needed to be assessed under the Karnataka Education Act, but the Court remained unconvinced, cautioning the state against complicating the education system with unnecessary Board exams. Case: ORGANISATION FOR UNAIDED RECOGNISED SCHOOLS ® (OUR SCHOOLS) v. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS, SLP(C) No. 8142/2024 www.legalmeet.in