Karnataka High Court Rejects the Plea Seeking Enforcement of State-Wide Curfew During SSLC Exams to Avoid the Spread of COVID-19 Among Students

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish...

Follow us

A writ petition filed, prayed for the writ of  Mandamus under article 226 of the Indian Constitution. To enforce state-wide curfew type restrictions on the days of SSLC Examination in Karnataka.

Facts of the Case

The petition concerns SSLC exams dated  25th June 2020 to 4th July 2020.  The petitioner prayed for the issue of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ. To impose state-wide curfew during the SSLC examination. To avoid spreading COVID – 19 among the students appearing for the exams.

Arguments before the Court

The petitioner submitted that there would be a congregation outside the examination center. The parents and students will assemble before and after the examination. Therefore, a failure of social distancing norms will ensue. Thus, the submission asked for a state-wide curfew to restrict the spread of COVID – 19.

The respondent submitted the decision for holding the SSLC exams and was questioned before the Court, which faced disposal by a detailed judgment and order dated 27th May 2020. On the very day, the board issued the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP). In that several safeguards were listed to ensure that the epidemic does not spread. The counsel submitted that the Apex Court has confirmed the said Judgement. He also submitted that approx. barricades are set up around 2879 centers across the state and buildings of the centres. They will follow the SOP and put in place the Court’s order.

Court’s Decision

The Court said “The petitioner is seeking a very drastic relief directing imposition of curfew virtually for half of every day on which SSLC examination is conducted. Whether a curfew should be imposed or not is a very serious question. The answer to the question should be best left to the wisdom of the experts in the field. Thus, we are unable to grant drastic relief.”

Furthermore, the Court observed that the petitioner’s concerns have some basis. But, the examination’s conduct will be  consistent with the SOP. The state government and the board have to ensure there is no congregation.

The Court disposed of the writ petition. It rejected the plea of the petitioner seeking statewide curfew in light of SSLC exams.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Filed Challenging the Judgment of Madras High Court in Ganesan v. State Represented by Its Inspector of Police

An appeal was filed before the Supreme court, challenging the judgment & order of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the HC judgment...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -