Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dhananjay Fulchand Khomane, a student, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court (Bench at Aurangabad) challenging an order dated 02 November 2022 passed by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education (respondent no. 3). The Board had refused to correct the certificate and marks memo issued to the petitioner, despite the fact that the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad (respondent no. 2) had passed an order under Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code directing correction of the school record, and the school (Orchid Techno School) had accordingly corrected the original record. The Board's refusal was based on Rule 59(3) of the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations, 1977, questioning the legality of the correction. The Court, after hearing both sides, observed that the issue was no longer res integra in light of the decision in Achari Abhijeet Mohanan Versus The State of Maharashtra and others (Writ Petition No. 1254/2021, dated 07 September 2022), to which one of the judges (Mangesh S. Patil, J.) was a member. The Court held that once the Education Officer passes an order under Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code and the school record is corrected, the Board has no power or jurisdiction to question it by resorting to Rule 59(3) of the Regulations of 1977. The Board is legally obliged to follow the course. Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the Board was directed to issue fresh marks memo and passing certificate to the petitioner within three weeks.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Correction of School Records - Jurisdiction of Board - Clause 26.4 of Secondary School Code and Rule 59(3) of Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations, 1977 - The issue was whether the Board could refuse to correct the certificate and marks memo after the Education Officer had passed an order under Clause 26.4 and the school record was corrected - The Court held that once the Education Officer passes an order under Clause 26.4 and the school record is corrected, the Board has no power or jurisdiction to question it by resorting to Rule 59(3) of the Regulations of 1977 - The Board is legally obliged to follow the course and issue fresh marks memo and passing certificate (Paras 2-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education can refuse to correct a certificate and marks memo based on Rule 59(3) of the Regulations of 1977 when the school record has been corrected pursuant to an order passed by the Education Officer under Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 02 November 2022 is quashed and set aside. The respondent no. 3 – Board shall, in accordance with the order passed by the Education Officer and the corrected school record, issue fresh marks memo and passing certificate to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of three weeks. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
Law Points
- Board has no power to question correction of school record made pursuant to Education Officer's order under Clause 26.4 of Secondary School Code
- Rule 59(3) of Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations
- 1977 cannot override such order
