MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court reserved its orders on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), seeking compensatory marks for Tamil medium students, who appeared in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET) this year, citing the flaws in the Tamil medium question paper.
A division bench, comprising Justices C T Selvam and A M Basheer Ahamed, heard the answers given by the CBSE to the four questions posed by them during the previous hearing regarding the steps taken by the Board in identifying and compiling the English words, i.e. the technical and scientific terms incapable of being translated into Tamil, and in educating the Tamil medium students and teachers about such words.
Assistant Solicitor General (ASG) V Kathirvelu and counsel for CBSE G Nagarajan contended that the Board did not play any direct role in translation of question paper to regional languages as it appointed only translators suggested by the States.
At the time of publishing answer key, CBSE had clearly stated on its website that students can register their complaints and grievances, said the ASG, further defending the Board and the government. In addition to this, the counsel for CBSE argued that the petitioner did not have the locus standi to file the litigation since only aggrieved persons can move to the Court in this case.
He went on to add that it was not the responsibility of the CBSE to inform or educate teachers about translating scientific terms as they themselves, as teachers, will be well aware of it.
Hearing the submissions of the counsel, the Judges raised a question asking why CBSE had published the NEET result a day prior to its originally scheduled date of results, and that too within just few hours after the same bench announced the first hearing into the PIL.
Coming down heavily on the Board for saying that the students had not come forward to complain when the answer keys were published, the Judges asked what is the use in correcting mistakes in the question paper after the examination was over. They also questioned the Board whether it mentioned in its notification that it was also inviting complaints regarding the question paper.
The Judges observed that the Board had been entrusted with the future of the students and should have verified its question paper properly before the examination. They expressed that it was the duty of the Board to ask the State government to produce a list of scientific terms that do not have an equivalent word in Tamil and inform the same to the students prior to the exam.
Earlier, senior counsel NGR Prasad, who appeared for the petitioner T K Rangarajan, submitted a list of words that were wrongly translated in the Tamil medium question paper with their correct version.
Court’s criticism
Coming down heavily on CBSE for saying that the students had not come forward to complain when the answer keys were published, the Judges asked what is the use in correcting mistakes in the question paper after the exam was over
Interim protection to film maker extended
Madurai: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court extended the interim order passed by it on an anticipatory bail petition, restraining the police from arresting documentary filmmaker Divya Bharathi by 10 days citing that the FIR registered against the filmmaker, as revealed by Additional Advocate General (AAG) K Chellapandian during the hearing, was registered at the Gudalur Police Station in the Nilgiris, which comes under the jurisdiction of the Madras High Court, Justice G R Swaminathan passed the order giving a breather to the petitioner to approach the Principal Seat. The filmmaker had approached the court seeking protection against arrest by police, claiming that policemen in plainclothes have been trying to detain her illegally without any warrant. She had also submitted that she was not informed on what charges was she wanted by the police.