|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mistakes by examination boards can well ruin a student’s career. In the case of Santosh Kumar Sahoo, it robbed him of an opportunity to get a job. Way back in 1983, when he appeared for the High School Certificate (HSC) examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Orissa, Sahoo was full of hope and optimism. Then a young man of 19, he was confident that his education would fetch him a decent job. But that was not to be. The board had made a mistake in his date of birth in the final pass certificate, and so he returned it with a request for rectification, and that was the last that he saw of his certificate. Meanwhile, even though he did well in many job interviews, he could not find employment in the absence of the certificate. Nearing 30, he decided that he should hold the board accountable for the suffering undergone by him. So he filed a complaint before the district consumer disputes redressal forum, Phulbani, Orissa. His plea was simple and reasonable. He wanted a direction to the board to issue the corrected certificate in 15 days and pay a compensation of Rs 75,000 for the job opportunities that he had lost, and Rs 25,000 towards mental harassment and anguish that he had suffered, in addition to Rs 5,000 towards costs of litigation. The district forum found reason in his demand and acceded. But the board was unwilling to accept the verdict and filed an appeal before the state commission. For nine years, the case remained pending, and eventually, the commission, in its verdict, reduced the compensation amount to Rs 25,000, out of which Rs 5,000 was required to be paid by the head master of the school through which he had taken the examination. Even this was challenged by the board before the apex court. Sahoo, too, could have challenged the reduction in compensation before the national commission, but may be he had had enough. Anyway, last month the apex court dismissed the appeal of the board, thereby upholding the verdict of the state commission (Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Orissa, vs Santosh Kumar Sahoo, RP No 1734 of 2004). But I don’t think Sahoo has much to celebrate, coming as it does nearly 14 years after he first moved the court. The reduced compensation amount would be equally distressing, I am sure. This case is a sad reminder of the delays in the system that deny justice to people like Sahoo. The case also highlights the urgent need for state governments to set up an effective system of grievance redress for students, particularly for those complaints pertaining to examination results. An independent Ombudsman could deliver justice quickly in such cases and end the agony of students who are victims of negligence by examination boards. Sahoo’s case also underscores the need for courts to deliver justice quickly. Beginning with the case of Bhupesh Khurana vs Vishwa Buddha Parisha (OP no 168 of 1994), where the apex court clearly held that complaints pertaining to education could be adjudicated by the consumer courts, there have been many orders upholding the right of students to compensation against negligent service. In the case of M.Ravindranath vs the Principal, Mercy College (RP NO 658 of 1007), the court came to the rescue of a student who was unfairly denied admission in a college of her choice and, thereby, threw open the process of admission in educational institutions to the scrutiny of courts. Then in the case of Board of Secondary Education vs Sasmita Moharana (FA NO 15 of 2007), it held that the courts cannot take a lenient view of negligence by examiners or examination boards. In this case, the board had declared her as ‘failed’ in the examination. However, re-checking of the computation of marks in the English paper, done in compliance with the order of the Orissa High Court, had revealed that she had indeed passed. But by then, the student had lost an academic year and, therefore, filed a complaint seeking compensation. While in some earlier cases, the apex court was of the view that issues pertaining to examinations were outside the purview of the courts, in this particular case, it held a contrary view, thereby giving students a forum for redress of their complaints pertaining to examinations. Of course, the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of the President, Board of Secondary Education, Orissa vs D.Sunvankar, also helped. In this case, the Supreme Court directed the board to pay a compensation of Rs 20,000 to a student for the mistake that it had made in his marksheet. However, for courts to be effective and really help students in distress, justice has to be quick.
|
||
|
|
||
