Delhi High Court Quashes CBSE Decision To Scrap 'Additional Subject' Facility For 2025 Class XII Pass-Outs
The Delhi High Court has quashed two CBSE notifications which had withdrawn the facility for Class XII pass-outs of the year 2025 to appear in an “Additional Subject” as private candidates, holding that the decision was arbitrary, retrospectively applied, and violative of the doctrine of legitimate expectation .
Justice Jasmeet Singh allowed a batch of petitions filed by students who had passed the Class XII Board Examinations in 2025, observing that the impugned policy change had been implemented without proper notification and without any transitional protection.
The Court held that CBSE Examination Bye-Laws have statutory force, and any amendment withdrawing a substantive right must be formally notified in a manner capable of reaching affected students, and can operate only prospectively.
The petitioner students had challenged CBSE's decision to remove the “Additional Subject” category for private candidates after they had taken a gap year relying on Clause 43(i) of the Bye-Laws, which permitted appearing in an additional subject within two years of passing Class XII.
Granting relief to the students, the Court noted that the amendment was made public only in September 2025, whereas the petitioners had cleared their board examinations in May 2025 and had already acted on the prevailing policy.
“Any amendment to the CBSE Bye Laws, particularly one which withdraws a benefit or creates a disqualification, must not only be formally incorporated in the Bye Laws, but also be adequately notified in advance so as to enable affected candidates to regulate their conduct accordingly. The same shall also apply prospectively, i.e from and after the date of notification dated 04.09.2025. Change in policy cannot be made to apply retrospectively particularly when the same works in the detriment of the beneficiaries,” the Court said.
Justice Singh said that the petitioners acted in accordance with the existing Bye Laws and the consistent past practice of CBSE and, therefore, had a legitimate expectation that after passing Class XII examination on May 13, 2025, the right to appear as private candidates for the Additional Subject examination, would be available to them and similarly placed students like in the immediately preceding years.
The Court said that the sudden withdrawal of this facility, without prior notice or any transitional provision, does not meet the standards of fairness required of administrative action.
It added that the CBSE, being the principal national body entrusted with regulating secondary and senior secondary education, cannot absolve itself of responsibility to ensure coherence of rules of senior secondary education with the rules the competitive of examination in India.
The Court further said that the education system in India is intertwined in such a manner that senior secondary education is not an isolated stage but forms the foundation upon which higher and professional education is built.
“….directing the students who have already passed Class XII under CBSE to seek recourse through NIOS disrupts the continuity of their academic record and undermines the coherence of the education system itself. In such a case the student would have to undergo the examination of all 5 subjects, which can never be a viable option,” the judge said.
While allowing the plea and quashing the two notifications, the Court directed the CBSE to take steps within three working days to make necessary arrangements for registration of petitioners for Additional Subject examination.
“Needless to say, this judgment is being passed in the light of peculiar facts of the present case wherein the students are graduates of Class XII of the 2025 Batch,” the judge said.
Counsel for Petitioners: Mr. Rajshekhar Rao, Sr. Adv. With Mr. Karan Nambiar, Mr. Lzafeer Ahmad B F, Mr. Abeer Malik, Mr. Shubham Arun, Advs
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Sahaj Garg, SPC for Respondent No.1, Ms. Manisha Singh, Adv. for Respondent No. 2
Title: PRABHROOP KAUR KAPOOR & ORS v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR