Digital transformation of public examination systems in India must be accompanied by robust grievance-redressal mechanisms.

Q. Digital transformation of public examination systems in India must be accompanied by robust grievance-redressal mechanisms. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

CBSE's circular of 9 February 2026 introduced On-Screen Marking (OSM) for Class XII, scanning answer books for evaluation on a digital platform while discontinuing post-result verification [1]. The resulting controversy shows that digitisation expands administrative scale far faster than it expands remedy — a gap that must be closed by design, not after the fact.

The case for digitisation - Speed and uniformity: on-screen evaluation replaces the posting of physical scripts to examiners' homes, cutting transit loss and enabling centralised quality monitoring [2]. - Policy alignment: NEP 2020 seeks competency-based, continuously tracked assessment, which presupposes digital infrastructure [5]. - Scalability: ~98 lakh Class XII scripts were digitised in a single cycle — a volume manual systems handle poorly [1].

Why redressal cannot be an afterthought - Errors migrate, they do not vanish: blurred and missing scans, mismatched sheets and unmarked answers were reported after the 13 May 2026 results, converting technical faults into permanent academic outcomes. - Access collapse: of roughly 18 lakh affected students, only about 4 lakh could actually view their evaluated scripts; portal and payment glitches blocked even the filing of complaints. - Rights dimension: the petition before the Supreme Court framed arbitrary or non-evaluation as offending Articles 14 and 21; the Court sought a status report and a one-member commission under S. Radha Chauhan was constituted to review OSM [3]. - Settled entitlement: in CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay (2011), the Court upheld an examinee's right to inspect evaluated answer-books under the RTI Act — a right technology must extend, not extinguish [4]. - Outsourcing gap: core evaluation run through a private vendor dilutes statutory accountability unless contractually anchored.

Digital evaluation is a welcome governance reform, but its legitimacy rests on the student's ability to see, question and correct her own script. A published SOP — mandatory pilot-testing, scan-quality audits, free script access, time-bound appeal and vendor liability clauses — would align OSM with the fairness that Articles 14 and 21 demand, converting a crisis of trust into a template for credible e-governance in education.

(~330 words)

Sources: 1. CBSE Circular CBSE/COORD/OSM/2026 (09.02.2026) — On-Screen Marking for Class XII — introduction of OSM, digital scanning of scripts, discontinuation of post-result verification 2. News on AIR (Prasar Bharati) — CBSE to introduce On-Screen Marking for Class 12 from 2026 exams — shift from physical dispatch of answer scripts to secure digital evaluation platform 3. Supreme Court of India — PIL on CBSE's On-Screen Marking system; status report sought (2026) — Articles 14 and 21 challenge, direction for status report, Radha Chauhan review commission 4. Central Board of Secondary Education v. Aditya Bandopadhyay, (2011) 8 SCC 497 — examinee's right to inspect evaluated answer-books under the RTI Act, 2005 5. Ministry of Education — NEP 2020: Assessment Reforms (Background Paper) — competency-based and continuous assessment reform agenda