IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 10940 of 2009(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- V.A.VINCENT, AGED 47 YEARS, VAZHUTHANAPPILLIL HOUSE,KONTHURUTHY ROAD, THEVARA. BY ADV. SRI.N.C.SAJITH SMT.T.J.MARIA GORETTI SMT.T.V.SHELJA RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, NEW DELHI. 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,NEW DELHI. R1 BY ADV. SMT.MOLY.E.V., CGC R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASST.S.G. OF INDIA SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR R2 BY ADV. SRI.DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.10940/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPERS . P2:- COPY OF THE COMPUTER QUESTION PAPERS. P3:- COPY OF THE NEWS PAPER REPORT. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.10940 of 2009-J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010. Judgment 1.Petitioner is the father of a student who appeared in the 12th board examinations conducted by the CBSE in 2009. He tries to project a case that the CBSE system of providing different sets of question papers for the same year is illogical. CBSE appears to have introduced such a system to get over the chances of copying. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that five sets of question papers for the same subject are distributed in Punjab and in Kerala, three sets are distributed. With this, the petitioner tries to say that there are better methods to overreach the probable copying. It is suggested that this could be done by jumbling up the questions so that the students could be excluded from copying the answer script of the neighbouring student. The petitioner also states WPC10940/09 -: 2 :- through learned counsel that the numerical questions for Science and Arts subjections could also be changed from question paper to question paper rather than to have three sets of question papers. 2.The Central Board of Secondary Education is established and is controlled by the Government of India. It has various inputs from academicians, from advisers in the field of education and also from senior officials in the administration. It also appears that it gets appropriate guidance from the Human Resources Ministry and also from the Ministry of Education and other attendant fields. The petitioner may have his views. Those views are suggested by him as more practical than those adopted by the CBSE. But, it is not for this Court to substitute the views and policies of the CBSE with either the views of the petitioner or those of the Court. It is settled principle of law that there would be no judicial interference in matters relating to WPC10940/09 -: 3 :- education except in exceptionally exceptional circumstances where interference cannot but be excluded, that too, to get over glaring instances of inexcusable arbitrariness, malafides etc. The matter in issue is essentially in the realm of policy making which excludes judicial review and issuance of directions unless the aforesaid yardstick is established. For the aforesaid reasons, no directions are called for. This writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/0706