MD ARAM vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~33 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + LPA 466/2025 & CM APPL.44118-20/2025 MD ARAM .....Appellant Through: Mr. Mohd. Azam Ansari, Advocate. versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Dhruv Rohtagi with Ms. Chandrika Sachdev and Mr. Dhruv Kumar, Advocates for R-1/GNCTD/DoE. Mr. Ashok Kumar with Ms. Chhavi Arora, Advocates for CBSE/R-2. % Date of Decision: 24.07.2025 CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA JUDGEMENT TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J: (ORAL) 1. Present Letters Patent Appeal has been filed assailing the judgement dated 09.07.2025 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the underlying writ petition bearing W.P.(C)10462/2024 filed by the appellant, while upholding the result of the appellant as ‘Essential Repeat’ as well as the decision of the respondent/Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) declaring him ineligible to appear for supplementary examinations. 2. It is the case of the appellant that in the XIIth Board Examinations, he could only pass in two subjects i.e. Hindi and Political Science out of the mandatory five subjects and failed in three subjects being English, History and Geography. The result declared by the CBSE showed ‘Essential Repeat’ SignatureLPA 466/2025 Not Verified Page 1 of 6 Digitally Signed By:MADHU SARDANA Signing Date:28.07.2025 12:32:54 for the appellant. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 8619/2024, which was disposed of vide order dated 12.06.2024 whereby the CBSE was directed to decide the representation of the appellant. In compliance of the said directions, the CBSE considered and rejected the representation of the appellant vide order dated 25.06.2024. The said rejection by the CBSE was challenged by the appellant by fil