The petitioner filed a writ petition in Andhra Pradesh High court challenging the withholding of AIBE results earlier in March 2020. Another plea was filed on Aug 06, against notification dated 30th July. This notification indefinitely postponed the AIBE 2020.
Brief Facts
The petitioner had appeared for the exam in September 2019. The results of 9 centres including centre at Visakhapatnam (petitioner’s centre). Aggrieved by the action, Advocate Bilal Syed had filed a petition in March 2020 against the impugned decision. Later the notification postponing AIBE indefinitely was issued on July 30,2020.
Submissions of the Petitioner
The petitioner has submitted that the respondent had absolutely no grounds for taking the said decision. He also submitted that the mismatch in code was not the fault of the students and they must not be punished for the same. Further, it was stated that the exam was an open book exam and thus there is no scope of malpractice in the same. it was submitted that merely because the respondent held the exam they can not withhold the results without a valid reason. It is important to consider the future of the lawyers who appeared for the exam and awaited the result, submitted by the petitioner. He has further contended that the entire centre must not be held for cheating, rather an individual guilty should only be held accountable.
thereby pleading the court to issue order, direction or writ against the impugned notification. He also stated that BCI has allowed universities to promote students considering their internal marks. Thus a similar approach should be adopted for AIBE.
Submissions of the Respondent
The Bar Council of India has submitted in the counter affidavit that the decision was taken only after a thorough discussion on mass cheating. They also contended that the candidates of these centres would be allowed to re-appear for the exam without any fee. They submitted that the ground for the notification is ‘mass cheating’. the ruling in Bihar School Examination case was brought to the notice. it was held in that case that if an exam as a whole was cancelled, it is not necessary to give an opportunity to each candidate to represent their case. The bar council opposed the plea saying there were sufficient grounds given the mal-practises adopted at these centres. Thus the allegation of absence of valid ground is incorrect.
On July 30, Bar Council postponed the examination indefinitely. The petitioner stated that this postponement has caused prejudice to lawyers like him. This is because they are prevented from filing vakalat. Also they are prevented from using welfare funds announced by the state government. The petition moved through Solomon Raju on Aug 6, against the notification dated 30th July, also highlighted the Covid situation. It stated it would be inadvisable to conduct AIBE in times like this where Covid cases are at a peak.
This plea before the Andhra Pradesh High Court awaits a decision amidst delay due to pandemic.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
