Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Adv Om Balkrishna Trivedi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the 'Best Five' policy introduced by the State of Maharashtra on 3rd June 2019. The policy applied to students who had appeared for the ICSE (Indian School Certificate Examination) conducted by the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination, New Delhi, and sought admission to the 11th standard in junior college. The petitioner's son, Abhay Trivedi, was a student at Anubhuti School in Jalgaon District and had appeared for the ICSE 2019 exams, with results declared on 7th May 2019. The 'Best Five' policy stated that for ICSE students, only the best five subjects would be considered for calculating the aggregate marks for admission, whereas for SSC (Secondary School Certificate) students, all subjects were counted. The petitioner argued that this policy was arbitrary, unreasonable, and discriminatory, violating Article 14. The ICSE syllabus had three groups: Group I (compulsory: English, second language, history/civics/geography), Group II (seven subjects including mathematics, science, etc.), and Group III (13 subjects including art, cookery, etc.). The policy allegedly disregarded the compulsory nature of Group I subjects and treated ICSE students unfairly compared to SSC students. The State defended the policy as a measure to standardize admissions across different boards. The Court analyzed the policy and found it to be arbitrary and unreasonable, as it failed to consider the ICSE curriculum structure and placed ICSE students at a disadvantage without any rational basis. The Court quashed the policy, holding that it violated Article 14. The decision was in favor of the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Arbitrariness and Unreasonableness - Policy Challenge - The State's 'Best Five' policy for ICSE students was challenged as arbitrary and discriminatory. The Court held that the policy was unreasonable as it disregarded the ICSE's compulsory subjects and treated ICSE students differently from SSC students without any rational basis. The policy was quashed. (Paras 1-28) B) Education Law - Junior College Admission - Best Five Policy - ICSE vs SSC - The State introduced a 'Best Five' policy for ICSE students, counting only five subjects for admission, while SSC students had all subjects counted. The Court found this discriminatory and violative of Article 14, as it placed ICSE students at a disadvantage. (Paras 3-28) C) Administrative Law - Policy Making - Reasonableness - The Court emphasized that policies must be reasonable and non-arbitrary. The 'Best Five' policy was struck down as it failed to consider the ICSE curriculum structure and was introduced without proper consultation. (Paras 10-28)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government's 'Best Five' policy for ICSE students seeking admission to 11th standard junior college is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The 'Best Five' policy introduced by the State of Maharashtra on 3rd June 2019 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the ICSE students' marks in all subjects for admission to 11th standard junior college.
Law Points
- Arbitrariness
- Unreasonableness
- Discrimination
- Article 14
- Article 226
- Policy challenge
- Educational policy
- ICSE
- SSC
- Best Five policy
- Junior college admission
