The Bombay High Court recently made an observation regarding the regulations in Maharashtra that prohibit a student from opting for the science stream after class 10 if they did not choose it in class 10. The division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale noted that students make subject choices around Class 8 or 9, and it would be unreasonable to expect a 14-year-old's decision to determine their entire future.
The court questioned the rationale behind not admitting 10th-grade students who did not choose science into the science stream later. It pointed out that subject choices in SCC/ICSE schools are made at least a year or two earlier, around the 8th or 9th standard. The court also referred to the National Education Policy, which emphasizes identifying and nurturing potential and providing flexible learning options. It stated that the old trifecta of Science-Arts-Commerce is being done away with in line with the policy.
The court criticized the inflexibility and tardiness of the approach taken by the Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education (MSBSHSE), the fourth respondent in the case, and questioned their purpose. The court asked whether the board's objective was to assist students and provide education opportunities or to find new ways to hinder them.
The case was filed by a student from Nashik who scored 92 percent in class 10 from ICSE and later opted for the science stream. Despite securing admission in the science stream and passing class 11 with first class, the MSBSHSE held him ineligible for the science stream and canceled his admission because he did not choose science as a subject in class 10.
The court examined the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Boards Act 1965, which allows only students who scored a minimum of 40 percent marks in science in class 10 exams to opt for the science stream. The petitioner had not chosen science subjects but had selected English, Hindi, History, Mathematics, Commercial Studies, and Physical Education.
The court questioned the clarity on what qualifies as "other comparable subjects" as mentioned in the Act, particularly regarding the ICSE board. It also considered the petitioner's performance and the duration for which he had studied science. The petitioner had completed class 11 and 12, performed well above average, and appeared for highly competitive entrance examinations, securing provisional admission in at least one prestigious engineering and technical college.
The court also raised the issue of the board conducting scrutiny after the petitioner had completed two years of class 11 and 12, rather than soon after admission to class 11.
As an interim order, the bench directed the MSBSHSE to declare the petitioner's class 12 result so that he could secure admission in an engineering college.
The petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate YS Jahagirdar and a team of advocates, while the respondents were represented by the Additional Government Pleader and other advocates.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: Maharashtra regulations disallowing student science stream class 10 Bombay High Court rationale subject choices determinative future National Education Policy flexible learning options inflexibility MSBSHSE eligibility Secondary and Higher Secondary Boards Act 1965 40 percent marks comparable subjects ICSE board performance class 11 class 12 entrance examinations provisional admission scrutiny engineering college petitioner respondents.
