Ensure Questions For Visually Impaired Students In Class 10, 12 Exams Are 'Specifically Mentioned': Gujarat High Court To State Board

The High Court has directed the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Board (GSHSB) to henceforth ensure that the list of instructions preceding questions for Class 10 and 12 examinations, shall specifically state which questions are to be attempted by visually impaired students. 

The petitioner argued that the 10th board exam for subject Basic Mathematics contained ambiguous instructions–the question paper at certain places mentioned that the questions were for visually impaired students.

It was her case that the instruction did not spell out as to which questions were for visually impaired students. It was contended that the petitioner got confused due to the instructions and attempted the questions which were for visually impaired students. It was contended that the petitioner probably attempted 18 to 20 marks' questions which were for visually impaired students.

It was argued that because these questions were not assessed, prejudice was caused to the petitioner.

Justice Nikhil Kariel after perusing the record in his order said that while no prejudice is caused to the petitioner in the present case, however a perusal of the question paper revealed that it "contained random instructions below certain questions as being only for visually impaired students".

The court after perusing the list of  instructions contained in the question paper observed that it did not specify whether the question preceding the instructions or the question post the instructions are for visually impaired students.

The high court observed that a reasonable doubt would be caused in anyone's mind, more particularly a student appearing in the 10th standard examination, as to whether the instructions would be relatable to the preceding questions or the later questions.

It thereafter directed:

"The respondent no.2 is directed to ensure that for examination held in future, both for standard 10th and 12th, the list of instructions preceding the actual questions shall specifically state as regards the questions only to be attended by the visually impaired students. Furthermore, the general instructions in the body of the question paper shall also specifically mention the question numbers which are for the students having visual impairment". 

The petitioner in her plea had sought a direction to the authorities to re-evaluate her Basic Mathematics answer-sheet and award her marks affected by the confusion and ambiguous instructions in the question paper. 

The high court said that while it appeared that the petitioner may have a reasonable grievance, but, at the same time, such grievance has not resulted in any prejudice being caused to the petitioner; hence it was not a fit case for issuing a prerogative writ. It said,

"This Court reaches the above conclusion on the basis that from the mark-sheet, the petitioner appears to have secured 59 marks out of total 80 marks in the Basic Mathematics subject. It is informed that the petitioner has now joined 11th standard, probably in the commerce stream. It is also not the case of the petitioner that because of the lack of marks, the petitioner who wanted to study in some other stream in the 12th standard, could not get appropriate admission; neither the same is the case made out from the pleadings of the petition nor is the same the case argued by learned advocate. It also appears to this Court that marks of 10th standard examination, though very important to a student, would not be the criteria for any future admission (except for standard 11) or any future employment".

The high court observed that it was not a case where because of non-consideration of the marks for the questions which the petitioner had attempted, though meant for students in the visually impaired category, the petitioner had failed the examination.

"Thus, overall, it would appear that the petitioner though may have fallen short of some marks, if the best case of the petitioner is accepted, yet, it would not appear to this Court that any prejudice is caused to the present petitioner," it added. 

Referring to judgments on invocation of power under Article 226, the court observed that after the results of standard 10th, where the students including the petitioner have already joined their new academic courses, "it would not be in larger public interest to interfere in the present petition and thereby opening the door for students like the petitioner to question the evaluation by the Board".

With respect to the substantive issue the high court that respondent no.2 board should have been alive to such a situation and should ensure that question papers in future, be it of standard 10th or standard 12th, such an ambiguity should not arise.

It said that the Board should ensure that question papers should specifically state at the commencement of the question paper the list of instructions as to which of the questions are only for visually impaired students.

"To this Court, it would appear that providing clarity to the students would go a long way in ensuring that the faith and trust placed by the students and parents all over the State in the Gujarat Secondary and Higher Secondary Board is justified," the court added. 

It thus disposed of the plea.

Case title: AASIYABANU MOHAMMED AFZAL SHAIKH v/s State of Gujarat & Ors.

Counsel for petitioner: Advocate Rafik Lokhandwala 

Counsel for R1-5: Asst Government Pleader Aditya Pathak 

Click Here To Read/Download Order 

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 116