Gauhati High Court
Sonali De And Anr vs Central Board Of Secondary Education ... on 22 May, 2026
Page No.# 1/8
GAHC010031402026
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/884/2026
SONALI DE AND ANR
W/O- DR. PIJUS KANTI DE, RESIDENT OF QUARTER NO. TYPE VI/NEW/A-2,
NIT SILCHAR CAMPUS, SILCHAR, PIN- 788010.
2: AYUSHMAN DE
S/O- DR. PIJUS KANTI DE
RESIDENT OF QUARTER NO. TYPE VI/NEW/A-2
NIT SILCHAR CAMPUS
SILCHAR
PIN- 788010
VERSUS
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND 2 ORS
NEW DELHI, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SIKSHA KENDRA 2,
COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, DELHI-110092.
2:THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
REGIONAL OFFICE
GUWAHATI
KHANAPARA
DIST.- KAMRUP METRO
ASSAM
PIN- 781022.
3:THE PRINCIPAL
KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA
NIT
SILCHAR
DIST. CACHAR
ASSAM
PIN- 788010
Page No.# 2/8
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR N SARMA, MS M BORAH
Advocate for the Respondent : SC, CBSE, MR. D BORAH (R3)
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN
ORDER
Date : 22.05.2026 Heard Mr. N. Sarma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. R. Bora, learned Standing Counsel representing respondent no.1 and 2, learned Standing Counsel for CBSE and Mr. D. Bora, learned Counsel representing no.3.
By this application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner no.2. for his appearing in the Class-XII (Science) Examination, 2026 by condoning the shortage of attendance which was due to the medical ground.
It is the case of the petitioners that petitioner no.2 after passing his Class-X examination from the said Kendriya Vidyalaya, N.I.T, Silchar suffered from eye issues. The petitioners had annexed with this writ petition, the prescriptions given by the various doctors from different hospitals. It is stated by the petitioners that petitioner no.2 is suffering from myopia with squint i.e. acute eye sight divergence problem for more than a year. He states that his eye issue was first diagnosed in December, 2024 in Narayana Nethralaya, Rajaji Nagar, Bangalore and ,thereafter, the petitioner no.2 has been treated in different Page No.# 3/8 hospitals including Sankara Nethralaya, Newtown, Kolkata as well as in other hospitals but it is stated by the petitioner that his eye problem had not improved and is still continuing. Petitioners also states that petitioner no.2 was not only suffering from eye problems but also had other problems with ears, nose, throat and lungs which required treatment and for that the petitioner no.2 was taken to various hospitals within the country.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the parents of the petitioner no.2 i.e. both petitioner no.1 and his father had intimated the principal of the said school on various dates one being 25.06.2025 about the problems faced by the petitioner no.2 with regard to his eyes and other issues. Petitioner no.1 wrote in the said letter that petitioner has been suffering from increasing eye sight issue since Covid-19 period and that his vision rapidly deteriorated and he developed a squint. It was also stated that petitioner no.2 had developed symptoms of derealisation, which implies that the petitioner at times fails to process whatever he sees in brain which had affected his memory and comprehension during class sessions. It was also stated that petitioner could not see the blackboard properly for intervening periods and that he had eye pain and other problems. As such petitioner no.1 had requested the Principal of the said school that petitioner no.2 had missed several school days and that he was studying at home and is committed to keep up with his syllabus. The petitioner no.1 had further requested authorities to consider his attendance sympathetically and grant him leave as per the medical records. Similar letters to the Principal was also written on 22.12.2025 by petitioner no.1 as well as letter dated 02.02.2026 by the father of the petitioner to Principal of the said school. Further by letter dated 10.02.2026, the father of the petitioner had also requested the Regional Director, Joint Secretary, CBSE to condone the Page No.# 4/8 shortage of attendance of petitioner no.2 due to the eye sight problem. In the said letter, the father of petitioner no.2 had specifically mentioned that petitioner no.2 is suffering from a prolonged illness since December 2024 and is being treated in various hospitals.
The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the instructions given by the controller of examinations to the Principals or Head of the schools affiliated to the CBSE provides that a minimum of 75 percent of attendance is mandatory for the students for appearing in the board examinations and it is further provided therein that board can offer 25 percent relaxation in cases of exigencies such as medical emergency, participation in national and international sports events and other events. As such he submits that since the petitioner no.2 has been suffering from prolonged illness with regard to his eyes 25 percent relaxation in his attendance should have been granted by the authorities concerned and the petitioner no.2 should have been allowed to appear in his Class-XII examination. Since it came to the knowledge of the petitioners that he will not be allowed to seat in the examination, the petitioners filed this writ petition before this Court and this Court vide order dated 17.02.2026 had observed that on the materials brought on the record by the petitioner no.2 and by noticing that parents of the petitioners were regularly updating the respondent authorities about the reason of petitioner no.2's absence in the school, the petitioner no.2 should not be deprived of the opportunity to appear in the Class-XII examination and in view of the said order, petitioner no.2 was allowed to seat for the said examination. Thereafter, by a subsequent order dated 24.04.2026, this Court directed the authorities to allow the petitioner no.2 to seat for his practical examination in the Chemistry paper with the further direction that results including the result of practical Page No.# 5/8 examination of petitioner no.2 shall not be declared and be kept in seal cover. The said orders were made for the benefit of the petitioner no.2 so that he does not loose years. The learned Counsel therefore submits that petitioner no.2 had appeared in his examination and his results are not declared and are kept in seal cover.
Ms. R. Bora, learned Standing Counsel for CBSE submits that as per the instructions given by the controller of examination, it is provided that the illness stated by the student should be of prolonged nature and the medical certificates has to be given by a Government Doctor and the request should also come from the parents and the medical reports should also be given to the authorities concerned for relaxation of 25 per cent of attendance, in case the student falls short of 75 per cent of the attendance. In the instant case, she submits neither the petitioner, himself nor his parents had intimated the authorities in time along with the medical documents showing that petitioner no.2 has been suffering from prolonged illness.
Mr. D. Bora, learned Counsel for respondent no.3 supports the submissions made by Ms. R Bora, learned Standing Counsel for CBSE and further submits that in the medical certificates annexed by the petitioner, it does not show that the petitioner was either suffering from prolonged illness or that he is advised for bed rest. The learned Counsel as such submits that there was no valid reason for his absence from school for such a long period, his attendance being 49.33 per cent. He submits that even if 25 per cent relaxation is given, still it does not come to 75 per cent of the attendance in respect of the petitioner no.2.
I have heard the Counsels and also have gone through the records.
Page No.# 6/8 It is seen that the petitioner had his eye sight problem from December, 2024 and he was first taken to hospital at Bangalore and thereafter to different hospitals in the country such as NIMHANS (Central Government), Indira Gandhi Institute of Child Health (Pediatric Hospital) in Karnataka Government, SMCH Silchar, Government of Assam, Narayana Netralaya, Rajajinagar, Bangalore (Central Government), Sankara Netralaya, New Town, Kolkata (Government recognized) and Choudhury eye hospital, Silchar, (Private Hospital). Amongst the said hospital, many hospitals were government hospitals and prescriptions from the Government Doctors were also available on records. It is also seen that the parents of the petitioner had given applications to the Principal of the school, where the petitioner no.2 was studying on various days during 2024 as well as 2025. The father of the petitioner was also seen to have written a letter to the Regional Director of CBSE for condoning the attendance of his son i.e. petitioner no.2. The instruction issued by the controller of examination on 04.08.2025 shows that although mandatory requirement of attendance for a student is 75 per cent for appearing in the board examination, however, the board can relax 25 percent in case of medical emergency or other reasons and in the SOP it is further provided that in case of shortage of attendance, schools are required to procure documents from students or parents and submit the same to the concerned Regional Office of the Board for condoning the shortage of attendance. It is further provided that the said relexation would be done only in case of prolonged illness and for that four conditions were provided and they are, request from the parent, medical certificate by a Government Doctor, medical reports and the recommendation of the school.
In the instant case, the first requirement, request from the parent is present since petitioner no.1 as well as the father of petitioner no.2 had written to the Page No.# 7/8 Principal of school as well as to other authorities both for the year 2024-2025. The second criteria i.e. medical certificate from a Government Doctor is , however, could not be placed by the petitioner or his parents but the prescription by the Government Doctor is placed before this Court and the information that the petitioner no.2 was under the treatment of Government Hospital was informed to the Principal of the said school. As per as the third requirement, medical reports are in place before this Court as well as before the concerned authorities. However, the fourth requirement that school has to recommend is however, not present in the instant case. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner no.1 and the father of the petitioner no.2 had written many letters to the Principal of the said school and it is not known to them as to whether Principal has written to the Regional Office of the Board for condoning the shortage of attendance. It is further seen that the father of the petitioner no.2 while intimating the Regional Director of CBSE had stated that petitioner no.2 was suffering from a prolonged illness as could be seen from his letter dated 10.02.2026.
In view of the same, it is noticed that in the instant case, 25 per cent relaxation can be granted by the board by taking into account the medical emergency of the petitioner no.2. It is however also seen that even after granting 25 per cent relaxation, the 75 per cent attendance will not be reached. It will be 0.67 per cent lesser than the required 75 per cent of the attendance. Seeing the medical emergency of petitioner no.2 and also taking into account, the fact that he has been studying in the said school since Class-I and had passed his Class-X examination with flying colors, the board is directed to condone the shortage of attendance of the petitioner as a peculiar case and declared the result of the petitioner both his practical and theory examination Page No.# 8/8 which is kept in sealed cover at this juncture. The said order is ,however, peculiar to the facts and circumstances of the instant case and will not be considered as a precedent for any other cases.
After declaration of the result, if the petitioner decides for any re-evaluation of his marks, the same should be allowed within a reasonable period of time.
Petition is disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant