The Delhi High Court refused to extend the CBSE Class XII answer-sheet verification and re-evaluation deadline, citing possible delays in results. The Court noted that reopening the portal could affect admissions and directed individual students to approach it if required.
The Delhi High Court declined to direct the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) to extend the deadline for its Class XII answer-sheet verification and re-evaluation process, despite concerns raised over alleged irregularities in the board’s On-Screen Marking (OSM) system.
A vacation Bench comprising Justice Neena Bansal Krishna and Justice Madhu Jain observed that reopening the portal for a longer period could delay the declaration of results and create difficulties for lakhs of students seeking admission to higher education programmes.
The Court stated that while affected students with individual grievances could approach the judiciary, it was not inclined to pass a blanket order extending the deadline for all candidates.
The Bench also directed that a public interest litigation (PIL) concerning alleged issues in the CBSE’s OSM process, filed by the National Students Union of India (NSUI), would be taken up by the regular roster Bench after the court vacation.
The Court remarked:
“For you, it’s one week, but the whole process gets delayed by a month. It’s not the question of one step; it’s the question of three other steps. If you enter now, it [results] will be delayed by a month. Let individuals approach. Let individuals come here and say,”
Background of the PIL:
The PIL before the Delhi High Court has been filed through NSUI President Vinod Jhakhar, raising concerns regarding alleged deficiencies in CBSE’s On-Screen Marking system used for evaluation of Class XII answer sheets. The petition seeks directions for awarding compensatory marks to students whose answer sheets were allegedly missing, unclear, improperly scanned or incorrectly evaluated.
The petitioner has also sought an independent investigation into what it described as:
“large-scale irregularities, deficiencies, technical issues and grievance-related failures concerning the OSM system”
The plea further seeks directions for manual rechecking and physical verification of answer sheets in cases where students dispute the accuracy of scanned copies or the evaluation carried out through the digital system.
The petition claims that several students, parents and teachers reported problems after the declaration of CBSE Class XII results, including blurred scanned answer sheets, missing pages, incomplete uploads, mismatch of answer sheets and unexpectedly low marks. According to the petitioner, these complaints point towards broader systemic issues in the OSM mechanism rather than isolated technical problems affecting a few students.
The plea also claims that CBSE itself had acknowledged technical difficulties with the online portal through which students accessed scanned copies of their evaluated answer books.
ALSO READ: CBSE’s New Three-Language Mandate Challenged in Supreme Court, Hearing Set for Next Week
The petitioner argued that because Class XII marks directly influence university admissions, scholarships and entry into professional courses, errors in evaluation could have serious consequences for students’ academic careers.
The petition highlighted that a large number of students attempted to use the verification and re-evaluation facility shortly after the announcement of results. According to the petitioner, around 1,27,146 applications concerning nearly 3,87,399 scanned answer sheets were submitted within a short period after the results were declared.
The plea sought an extension of the verification and re-evaluation portal by an additional month, contending that affected students required adequate opportunity to examine their answer sheets and seek correction of genuine errors.
Submissions before the Court
CBSE Opposes Extension Plea: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appeared for CBSE and opposed the request for extending the re-evaluation window. He argued that granting additional time at this stage would disrupt the entire examination result process and could adversely affect students awaiting university admissions.
Mehta informed the Court that a significant number of students had already applied for verification and re-evaluation and that any further delay would impact the academic timelines of all Class XII candidates.
He submitted:
“Students who are aggrieved have come to us. Over 1.67 lakh student have applied for evaluation. Now their [petitioner’s] request is to extend the deadline. At the behest of whom? Any delay would delay all 7.8 lakh students [who appeared for Class XII CBSE exams] because based on these marks, you get admission in all undergraduate studies, where the deadline is fixed,”
According to CBSE, the Class XII results play a crucial role in determining admissions to undergraduate programmes across the country, and any postponement in the evaluation process could affect the academic calendar of universities and professional institutions.
NSUI Seeks Additional Time for Students: Appearing for NSUI, Advocate Muhammad Ali Khan argued that several students affected by alleged technical and evaluation-related issues would not be able to approach the High Court individually due to practical difficulties.
He submitted that many students were minors and may not have the financial or logistical ability to initiate separate proceedings. Khan argued that the extension sought was limited and would only allow students additional time to seek appropriate remedies.
He stated:
“Many of them [students] are minors, they don’t have the resources to come to Court. They have extended it [the re-evaluation window] twice. I am asking it to be extended for four more days,”
High Court’s Observations
The High Court, however, declined to grant a general extension, leaving individual students with grievances at liberty to approach the Court separately while allowing the broader PIL to be considered after the court vacation.
However, after hearing both sides, the Bench refused to issue any direction extending the deadline.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE