Orissa High Court orders CBSE to publish Class 12 result cancelled over ‘similar answers’, slams ‘pick and choose’ approach

‘Negligence of CBSE agents’

• The principals of the examination centres, centre superintendents and invigilators who are the agents of the CBSE, have acted negligently and not in the manner they were instructed.
• Neither the principal nor the centre superintendent nor the invigilators had made any allegation of malpractice by the petitioner during the examination.
• It is placed on record that the result of the examination of all the students of the same centre, in which the petitioner appeared, has already been published in due time.
• However, the result of the petitioner, along with a few students, has been cancelled on the grounds of her indulgence in malpractice in some questions in two subjects during the examination, alleging similar answers to those of other students.

• It is important to note that the conduct of examinations is primarily vested in the authorities in charge of the institution at the time of conducting the examination.
• There was no allegation of malpractice by the petitioner during the examination conducted by the person in charge of the examination centre.
• The cancellation of the result of the petitioner’s Class 12 results based on inference, presumptions, conjectures and surmises without any direct evidence or material is not sustainable under the law.
• The CBSE is directed to publish the results of the petitioner’s Class 12 examination of 2025 within a week.

Class 12 exam, malpractice allegations

• Barsha was a regular student of Odisha Adarsha Vidyalaya, Bandupali, and appeared for Class 12 examinations at Padampur Public School Centre based on the admit card issued by the authorities.
• She claimed that she performed extremely well, but her result on the website was published on May 13, 2025, as ‘RL’ or result later.
• RL suggests that the student’s result is under preparation and it will be declared soon.
• Subsequently, her mark statement-cum-certificate was communicated to her through Adarsha Vidyalaya without awarding any mark to her in any subject, but indicating UNM (unfair means).
• The petitioner sought information from the Odisha Adarsha Vidyalaya under the Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005, regarding the cause of withholding her result.
• In response, the school principal wrote to the CBSE, which answered that her results in two subjects, Chemistry and English, were cancelled on the grounds of the adoption of unfair means during the examination.
• It was stated by CBSE that most of her answers in Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) in Chemistry and the answers in question numbers 12 and 13 in English were similar to several other adjacent students of the centre; therefore, her results in all subjects have been cancelled.

• The petitioner decided to file a case against the CBSE, seeking publication of her results.
• The said plea of the petitioner was decided analogously with other petitions filed before the court in September 2025.
• The court directed the CBSE to enquire after giving a reasonable opportunity of participation to the petitioner, stipulating the outer limit of that enquiry within two weeks, keeping all the contentions of the parties open.
• Subsequently, the CBSE conducted an enquiry into the matter, and a copy of the memorandum of October 8, 2025, was issued by the board, stating that the petitioner was found indulging in unfair means.
• The petitioner claimed that the results of almost all candidates of the same centre have been published, except for a few, like her.
• She further added that her result was cancelled by the CBSE in what amounted to a discriminatory attitude towards her.

‘Additional subject ruling’

The Delhi High Court has previously dismissed the CBSE’s plea against the single judge order that permitted private candidates to appear for ‘additional subject’ examinations for the 2025-2026 academic session.

Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said that the action of the CBSE will not only defeat the valuable rights of the students but will also “jeopardise” their educational careers.

It was highlighted by the court that the CBSE’s action suffers from grave “arbitrariness”.  The Delhi High Court further added that the board’s attempt to abruptly discontinue the category is “absolutely arbitrary and unreasonable”.