Karnataka High Court allows State Government to go ahead with board exams for classes 5, 8 and 9

The Bench also directed the Government to continue the halted exams as exams for classes 5,8 and 9 were stopped midway following the apex court’s judgement

A division bench of the High Court of Karnataka on March 22 allowed the State Government to conduct board exams for classes 5, 8, 9 and 11 for the academic year 2023-24.

The bench also directed the government to continue the halted exams (for classes 5, 8, 9), and also continue and complete the process of evaluation of exams conducted for class 11, which were completed even before the single judge’s verdict on March 6. Exams for classes 5, 8 and 9 were stopped midway following the apex court’s judgment.

The bench told the government to hold consultations with the stakeholders before issuing a notification for holding board exams for the next academic year.

The bench comprising Justice K. Somashekar and Justice Rajesh Rai K. passed the order by allowing the appeal filed by the State Government challenging the March 6 judgment of a single judge, who had quashed the October 2023 decision of the State Government to hold board exams for these classes through the Karnataka State Examination and Assessment Board (KSEAB).

The single judge had held that the scheme of holding board exams was taken without framing the rules under Sections 22 and 145 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983, which mandates that the government will have to frame rules for implementation of the examination system besides seeking views from stakeholders prior to finalising such rules.

However, now the bench has held that the notifications issued by the State Government to hold board exams are to be construed as only the guidelines by exercising the powers under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

Though the bench, on March 7, had initially passed an interim order staying the single judge’s verdict allowing the government to go ahead with the board exams, the Supreme Court had on March 12 set aside the interim order of the division bench while directing the bench to hear the appeal on merit.