You Want To Curb Intelligence?: MP High Court Seeks Centre's Policy On Child Prodigies In CBSE Appeal Against 10-Yr-Old's Admission To Class 9

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, while issuing notice on CBSE's appeal against provisional admission granted to a 10-year-old child in Class 9, sought explanation from the Central government regarding their policies on child prodigies.

A single bench had directed CBSE to consider provisional admission on a father's plea claiming that his son was allowed to study from class 1 to class 8 but was denied admission in class 9. However, the CBSE Chairman preferred this appeal, contending that the National Education Policy and Clause 6 of Chapter 3 of the Examination Bylaws do not permit admission of a 10 year old child in class 9. 

"So you have not heard of child prodigies? People who are MBBS doctors at age of 14. You want to curb intelligence? World over, there is a surgeon at age of 10, you do not want him in class 9?" the division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf orally told CBSE.

The bench observed that exceptional students across the world have achieved remarkable feats at an early age and should not be held behind merely due to policy restrictions. The court orally remarked, "if a bright student is able to clear class 9 and class 10, how is the government affected?". 

The counsel appearing for CBSE argued that the said policies were drafted by experts and had a purpose and rationale behind them. 

Unconvinced, the bench empahsized that "At age of seven, a person become a surgeon, in India. Then you have at the age of 12 a grandmaster at chess, Indian. At age of 13, a person founded a logistic company". The bench further remarked, "Your national education policy then needs a relook". 

Remembering their days in school, the division bench observed, "you see exceptions are always there. When we were studying in school, some people used to get double promotion. Exceptionally good students got double promotions". 

The counsel for CBSE, however, claimed that per the NEP- schools have to follow pattern of 5+3+3+4, meaning a child of 6 years will be granted admission in class 1. 

The bench further inquired how many years the child would have to wait to get admission in class 9 per the NEP. The counsel for CBSE answered that the child would have to wait for two years. 

Thereafter, the division bench remarked, "no, there is a surgeon, world of child prodigies are there; you (CBSE) are not willing to accept it". 

The counsel for CBSE claimed that per the Examination Bylaws, the policy that is most prevalent in the State has to be followed by school. 

While issuing notice, the court questioned the counsel appearing for the Union, "Please tell us what do you want to do about child prodigies. On the one hand, Union of India is recognising them and giving them awards. And here you want to curb intelligence". 

With these observations, the bench ordered, 

"Issue notice. Notice accepted by learned counsel appearing for respondent no 2 and state government respondent no 3. Notice shall issued to respondent no 1 and 4. Returnable on October 6". 

Case Title: Chairman v Aarav Singh (WA 2660/2025)