The Supreme Court has disposed of a batch of petitions filed by Class XII students from Gulf countries challenging the Central Board of Secondary Education's (CBSE) special assessment scheme introduced after the cancellation of Board examinations in the West Asia region amid the prevailing war situation in the Middle East.

A Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Prasanna B. Varale declined to accept the petitioners' request to allow the affected students to appear for their examinations alongside students scheduled to take the compartment examinations.

The Court, however, took on record the CBSE's assurance that steps would be taken to enable the affected students to appear for a fresh examination at the earliest feasible opportunity.

The petitions were filed by students studying in CBSE-affiliated schools in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and Bahrain. The petitioners challenged the assessment methodology adopted by CBSE for the 2025–26 academic session after Board examinations in several subjects were cancelled because of the geopolitical situation and security concerns in the region.

CBSE's assessment scheme, notified on March 27, 2026, provided for assessment of cancelled papers on the basis of school-level examinations, including quarterly, half-yearly and pre-board examinations. The petitioners contended that this methodology had resulted in marks substantially lower than what many students would have obtained had they been permitted to take the regular Board examinations.

The plea had highlighted the consequences for students seeking admission to higher education. According to the petition, students seeking admission under schemes such as Direct Admission of Students Abroad (DASA) and Children of Indian Workers in Gulf Countries (CIWG) were particularly affected, as these routes prescribe a minimum aggregate of 75 per cent marks for eligibility.

The petitioners also claimed that some students who had qualified in JEE Main were nevertheless rendered ineligible for admission because of the marks awarded under the special assessment scheme. Others, the plea said, had either been declared failed or placed in the compartment category despite having a consistent record of academic performance.

During the proceedings, the CBSE told the Court that its overriding concern throughout the episode had been the welfare and academic future of the affected students. It defended the March 27 assessment scheme as a good-faith attempt to ensure that students did not remain without results merely because examinations could not be conducted due to war-related circumstances.

The Board also informed the Court that its policy contemplated a further examination for students dissatisfied with the assessment, to be conducted once conditions in the affected countries became conducive and the exercise was logistically feasible.

Solicitor General of India, Tushar Mehta, further submitted that CBSE was prepared to facilitate admissions on the basis of provisional or assessed results, provide expedited re-evaluation and verification facilities, and conduct a special examination when feasible. The submission noted that the measures would have to account for 23,052 similarly situated candidates, rather than only the petitioners.

The petitioners had urged the Court to permit the affected students to write the examination along with students appearing in the compartment examinations. The Bench, however, accepted the submission of the Solicitor General that extending that facility to all the affected students was not feasible.

At the same time, the Court recorded the suggestion placed by the Solicitor General at the earlier hearing on July 28 that the time required for the next examination could potentially be compressed from 82 days to 70 days. The Court left it to the respondents to decide whether such a reduction could practically be undertaken.

“We are inclined to dispose of the present writ petitions so as to enable the writ petitioners to be in a position to compete in the next examination at the earliest point of time, and also facilitate them to compete for higher studies next year,” the Bench said in the order passed on July 30 (uploaded on August 12).

Cause Title: Adithian Rajmohan Nair & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

Click here to read the order