*THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL NO: 542 OF 2008 % 28.05.2008 Between: Dogga V.George ... PETITIONER AND The Government of Andhra Pradesh rep. By its Principal Secretary, Education (SE-Exams) Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad, and others. ...RESPONDENTS ! COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: Sri S.Gopal Rao ^ COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS: G.P. for School Education < Gist: > Head Note: ? CITATIONS: -Nil- THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT APPEAL NO: 542 OF 2008 JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice L. Narasimha Reddy) The appellant is a minor, aged 10 years. He is studying in St. George High School, Kothavalasa of Vizianagaram District. It is stated that while he was prosecuting 2nd class in that school, the school authorities have promoted him to 5th class, in the academic year 2005- 06, on account of his extraordinary brilliance, and in classes 5th and 6th also, he secured almost 90% marks. Being confident of his ability, he wanted to appear in the SSC examination, on completion of 6th class itself. According to the prevailing Rules, a candidate must not be less than 14 years of age, as on 1st August of the concerned year, to appear in SSC examination. A representation was made by the School, to the Principal Secretary, Education (SE-Exams) Department, the 1st respondent herein, on behalf of the petitioner, with a request to relax the minimum age limit. The same was rejected, vide memo dated 17.11.2007, stating that a policy decision was taken by the Government on 8.6.2006, not to entertain any request for relaxation of age, beyond two years. Thereafter, a similar representation was made to the Director of Government Examinations, the 2nd respondent herein. The latter refused to accede to the request, vide his proceedings dated 12.2.2008. It was stated that a candidate must have completed 14 years of age, by 31st August of the concerned academic year, for appearing in the SSC Examination, and in extraordinary cases, the minimum age can be relaxed, maximum up to two years by the Government. On finding that the relaxation that is pleaded in case of the appellant is almost more than five years, the application was rejected. The appellant, represented by his father, filed W.P.No.5119 of 2008, assailing the memo dated 12.2.2008. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, through order dated 29.4.2008. Hence this Writ Appeal. Sri S. Gopal Rao, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the extraordinary intelligence and brilliance of the appellant was proved beyond doubt, be it in the form of accelerated promotion from 2nd class to 5th class, or from the marks secured by him in 5th and 6th classes. He contends that when candidates are permitted to take the SSC examination, without formal study in classes 7th to 10th, the respondents ought to have encouraged and permitted the appellant, to go further. He submits that the learned Single Judge has also got calibrated the merit of the appellant, by subjecting him to assessment by a Professor in Psychology, and even that supported the claim of the appellant. Learned Government Pleader for School Education, on the other hand, submits that the rules, prescribing the minimum age limits for candidates, who intend to appear in the SSC examination, are framed, after thorough study and research. He contends that 14 years is found to be the proper age, at which a student can complete Matriculation, or Secondary Examination, and the mere fact that any particular student is below or above the average intelligence needed for the course, cannot be a factor to relax the age. The appellant, his parents, as well as the Administration of the School, at which he is studying, are confident about his academic capabilities, and are convinced that he can clear the SSC examination with meritorious marks, by taking the same after completion of 6th class. Respondents 1 and 2 have stipulated the age limit for appearing in the SSC examination, as 14 years. In the ordinary course, a student must have studied Classes 1 to 10, before taking the examination. Even where an individual has not undergone formal education, he can take the SSC examination, only if he is 14 years of age, as on 31st August of the concerned year. Powers of relaxation are conferred upon various authorities to certain limit. The District Education Officer is conferred with the power to relax the age up to 1½ years, the Director of Government Examinations from 1½ years to 2 years, and the Government for the period, above 2 years. Inasmuch as the relaxation that was needed in case of the appellant was more than 5 years, an application was made to the 1st respondent. In view of the policy decision taken by it, not to relax the minimum age beyond two years, the 1st respondent rejected the application, vide memo dated 17.11.2007. The subsequent representation, made on behalf of the appellant to the 2nd respondent is, for all practical purposes, nugatory, since its power to relax the age limit was restricted to two years. Therefore, it needs to be seen as to whether any illegality has been committed by the 1st respondent, in rejecting the representation of the appellant for relaxing the limits of minimum age, to the extent of about 5 years. Relaxation of any condition, by its very nature, is discretionary, and no individual can claim it, as of right. Ultimately, it is for the authority conferred with the power to relax, to satisfy itself as to whether the circumstances warranting the same, exist. It is a universal truth that no individuals are endowed with the same amount of intelligence, wisdom, or grasping power. The pattern of education, study of various courses, and other similar matters are determined, by taking into account the general features that can be treated as common, for the individuals, that study the concerned courses. The relevant factors, such as, content and duration of course, the age at which the persons can enter or complete the same, etc., are decided by the expert bodies, after thorough study and research. No court can sit as an appellate authority, in such matters, and can substitute its opinion. It is quite possible, if not common, that even at a stipulated age, or on completion of a particular duration of course, the capabilities of all the candidates, who receive same instructions, are not similar. The vast difference of marks secured by the candidates, at the end examination of various courses, vouches for this reality. Once a set of standard parameters are prescribed, they cannot be altered to suit the convenience of a student, who is above or below the prescribed standard, be it as regards age, content of course, or other similar parameters. It is not as if that the rulemaking authority is not aware of the fact that there are certain candidates, who are capable of taking the end examination, either without undergoing the instructions for full length of the course, or before attaining the stipulated age limit. The pattern of the course is framed, in a way, comparable to a situation, under which, a bud blossoms into a healthy and perfect flower. Metamorphosis invariably needs gestation period. Acceleration of the blossoming or ripening would only result in imperfect flower or fruit, some times leading to damage to the plant itself. In these days of clamor for breaking the records, or for being recognized after extraordinary accomplishments, it is not uncommon that people feel the compliance with rules, as hurdles. Naturally, prayers for relaxation, or removal of the hurdles, are made. Howsoever anxious the persons interested may be, the custodian of the public interest can neither be tempted, nor compelled to facilitate such adventures. Instances are not lacking, where deviation from the normal course, on account of temptation to attract public attention, has proved too costly, and in some cases, counter productive. On its part, the 1st respondent has taken a policy decision, not to relax the age beyond two years, under any circumstances, through memo dated 8.6.2006. The same was not challenged in the writ petition. Obviously, with a view to be sure as to the actual capability of the appellant and to examine the validity of the decision taken by respondents 1 and 2, the learned Single Judge invited an opinion from the Head of Department of Psychology, Andhra University, about the capabilities of the appellant. The Professor, who thoroughly examined the appellant, virtually sounded a note of caution. He opined that the restlessness, inattention, reluctance to respond, excessive time on doing the tests, perceived from the appellant during the test process, are ways of expressing resentment indirectly. It was also suggested that though the appellant does not have any symptoms of maladjustment or succumbing to pressure, the factors that are noted in him, can be precursors, or indications of future problems. The learned Single Judge took these and other relevant factors, into account, and refused to interfere with the orders passed by respondents 1 and 2. We are in total agreement with the conclusions arrived at by the learned Single Judge. Whatever may have been the temptations for the appellant, or his parents, to take a long leap, or to skip the milestones, the exercise undertaken by the Professor of Psychology proved beyond doubt that such course would not at all be in the interest of the appellant. At least now, his parents must realize that their anxiety to get a rare recognition, would prove costly for their child. At any rate, no illegality in the decision, or the decision making process, is established. Hence, the writ appeal is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J. _____________________________ RAMESH RANGANATHAN, J. Dt. 28-05-2008. Note: L.R. copies to be marked. (B/o) PAN