HC declares provision for qualifying in each of 3 parts of HSC Sc subjects illegal
FE Report | Thursday, 20 March 2014
The High Court (HC) in a judgment has declared the present provision for qualifying in each of the three parts of the science subjects in the HSC examinations 'illegal', sources said.
The three parts are: objective with 35 marks, creativity 40 marks and practical 25 marks.
The HC bench comprising Justice Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque and Justice ABM Altaf Hossain passed the judgment following a writ petition filed by Farah Tasnim Raisa, a student who took part in the HSC examination- 2013 under the Dhaka education board and claimed to have been victim of the new system.
"Though the judgment was delivered in response to a writ petition, the authorities concerned will not be able to continue such examination system in the future as it (system) was introduced in violation of the relevant laws," petitioner's lawyer Shah Mohammad Ahsanur Rahman told the FE.
Earlier on October 7 last year, the HC issued a rule seeking explanation as to why the splitting of the science papers-Physics, Chemistry and Biology-into three parts in the HSC examination-2013 and imposing condition to pass in the three parts separately in violation of section 39(1) and 5 of the Intermediate and Secondary Education Ordinance-1961 should not be declared illegal.
In the rule, the HC also wanted to know as to why the respondents should not be directed to re-examine the petitioner's scripts and accordingly intimate the re-evaluated result to the petitioner.
After hearing the matter, the HC made the rule 'absolute' with some observations, according to the full text of the judgment published recently.
Education secretary, chairman, Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Dhaka, board's secretary and its controller of examinations were made respondents in the rule.
Advocate AJ Mohammad Ali, Advocate Shah Mohammad Ahsanur Rahman, Advocate Sheikh Fazle Noor Taposh MP and Advocate Mohammad Mehedi Hasan Chowdhury represented, the petitioner in the court while Advocate Taufiq Newaz and Advocate SM Moonir appeared for the respondents.