Kerala High Court
Priyanka Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 17 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA,
1943
WP(C) NO. 12412 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 SALVIA HUSSAIN(MINOR)
AGED 17 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER K.HUSSAIN,
K.K.HOUSE, KOOTTIKADA.P.O, THATTAMALA,
KOLLAM-691020.(STUDYING IN STANDARD XII,
NATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL, MUKHATHALA.P.O,
KOLLAM).
2 SIBI WILSON(MINOR),
AGED 17 YEARS
REPRESENTED BY HIS FATHER WILSON V.SAMUEL,
REBOBOTH BHAVAN, KEDIKA,KAITHAPARAMP.P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA-691526.
(STUDYING IN STANDARD XII, PADMASREE CENTRAL
SCHOOL, ENATH, PATHANAMTHITTA)
3 KERALA C.B.S.E.SCHOOL MANAGEMENTS ASSOCIATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY
P.S.RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, PENTA TOWER, KALOOR,
KOCHI-682017.
BY ADVS.
P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
K.SUDHINKUMAR
S.K.ADHITHYAN
SABU PULLAN
GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..2..
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE
EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI
NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI
NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
4 *ADDL.R4.
PRIVATE SCHOOL GRADUATE TEACHERS ASSOCATION
KERALA (PGTA),
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, SUDHEER
CHANDRAN, S.V.H.S., PULLAD P.O., THIRUVALLA,
RESIDING AT SREE VIHAR, PUZHAVATHU,
CHANGANACHERRY P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686101.
ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADER AS PER ORDER DATED
17.9.2021 IN I.A.NO.1/2021
BY ADVS.
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
SRI.SIJI ANTONY
SRI.P.S.SAJEEV (CHIRAYIL)
ADV.SRI.K.P.SATHEESAN, SR.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.12788/2021,
14996/2021, 17270/2021, 18774/2021 AND 19046/21, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..3..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 12788 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 THEJASWINI.S
AGED 17 YEARS
REP. BY HER FATHER SASHI MALAMMEL,
KRISHNAKRIBHA, VILIPPAL PARAMBA, KUNNAMANGALAM
P.O., KOZHIKODE 673 571
(STUDYING IN STANDARD XII, AUXILIUM NAVA JYOTI
SCHOOL KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE 673 571)
2 SIDHARATH SAJI NAIR
AGED 17 YEARS
REP. BY HIS FATHER SAJI K.P., PANCHAJANYAM,
CHELAVUR P.O., KOZHIKODE
(STUDYING IN STANDARD XII, AUXILIUM NAVA JYOTI
SCHOOL KUNNAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE 673 571)
3 ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOLS FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL
CERTIFICATE KERALA
REGION,REG.NO.TVM/TC/1052/2014
KURIAKOSE ELIAS ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL, MANNANAM
P.O., KOTTAYAM 686 561
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT FR. VARGHESE EDATHICHIRA,
BY ADVS.
K.B.GANGESH
ATHIRA A.MENON
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..4..
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER
EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695
001
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI
NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI
NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
BY SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.12788/2021,
14996/2021, 17270/2021, 18774/2021 AND 19046/21, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..5..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 14996 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
1 SAMEERA T.S
AGED 18 YEARS, D/O.THALHATH, T.S.HOUSE,
PULIPPARA, PANGODE P.O., PIN-695609.
2 ADHEEL MATHEW,
AGED 18 YEARS, S/O.MATHEW PHILIP, ARA ACRE
BUNGLOW, PAPER MILL P.O., PUNALUR, VILAKKUDY,
KOLLAM-691332.
BY ADVS.
ARJUN SREEDHAR
T.K.SANDEEP
ARUN KRISHNA DHAN
ALEX ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER
EDUCATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
695001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI
NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..6..
EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SHANTHI
NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
BY SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.12418/2021,
12788/2021, 17270/2021, 18774/2021 AND 19046/21, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..7..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 17270 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
PRIYANKA THOMAS
AGED 18 YEARS
D/O. SANJU THOMAS MATHEW, TC 13/2198,
GOWREESAPATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -4.
BY ADVS.
SUMAN CHAKRAVARTHY
SANDEEP T.GEORGE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS,
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE
EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SHANTHI
NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
4 COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE
EXAMINATION
(CISCE), PRAGATHI HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR, 47-48,
NEHRU PALACE, NEW DELHI - 110019,
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..8..
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND
SECRETARY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR, STATE ATTORNEY
SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.12418/2021,
12788/2021, 14996/2021, 18774/2021 AND 19046/21, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..9..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 18774 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
S.SIDHARTH NAIR
AGED 18 YEARS
S/O. G. SURESH, SARAYU,
VENGOOR, ANGAMALY,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683572,
(PASS OUT IN 2021 FROM STANDARD XII,
CHAVARA POLICE SCHOOL PALA,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT)
BY ADVS.
P.M.JOSHI
SIJI K.PAUL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
2 THE COMMISSIONER OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
EXAMINATIONS, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SHANTHI NAGAR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
3 THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION
OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..10..
EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
BY SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C)NOS.12418/2021,
12788/2021, 14996/2021, 17270/2021 AND 19046/21, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..11..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 19046 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
MS.SWACHANDA ROY,
AGED 18 YEARS
D/O.MATHEW.C.V., FLAT NO.501, SYNERGY ENCLAVE,
SMARTO ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, KOCHI-682 020.
BY ADV M.A.ASIF
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER
EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
2 ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATIION,
NELSON MANDELA MARG, VASANT KUNJ, NEW DELHI-110
067, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY.
3 CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION,
SHIKSHA KENDRA, 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET
VIHAR, NEW DELHI-110 092, REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY.
4 REGIONAL OFFICER,
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, CTTC,
ADMIN BLOCK, BSNL RTTC CAMPUS, KAIMANAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 040.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..12..
5 COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATION,
OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE
EXAMINATION, 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BUILDING, SS KOVIL
ROAD, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
BY SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL
SRI.NIRMAL S., SC, CBSE SRI.SAJITH KUMAR, SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, ALONG WITH
WP(C)NOS.12418/2021, 12788/2021, 14996/2021,
17270/2021, 18774/2021 AND 19046/21, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..13..
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) Nos.12412, 12788, 14996, 17270,
18774 and 19046 of 2021
-------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of September, 2021.
JUDGMENT
Since common questions arise for consideration in
this batch of writ petitions, they are disposed of by this
common judgment. Parties and documents are referred to in
the judgment, unless otherwise mentioned, as they appear in
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021.
2. The matters relate to admission to engineering
degree courses for the academic year 2021-2022 through the
entrance examination conducted by the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations, Government of Kerala. Ext.P3 is the
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..14..
prospectus issued by the Commissioner for Entrance
Examinations for the said purpose with the concurrence of the
State Government. The basic qualification for admission to
engineering courses as per the prospectus is a pass in the 12 th
standard examination with an aggregate of 45% marks for the
subjects Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. In terms of
Ext.P3 prospectus, the rank list for admission is prepared by
giving equal weightage to the score of the candidates in the
entrance examination as also the marks in the qualifying
examination for the subjects, Physics, Chemistry and
Mathematics, after standardising the marks of the candidates
in the qualifying examination conducted by different Boards
applying the formula provided in the prospectus for the said
purpose. The Commissioner for Entrance Examinations has
invited applications for admission to various professional
courses including engineering courses through the entrance
examination for the ensuing academic year in terms of a
notification issued by him on 31.05.2021.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..15..
3. Petitioners 1 and 2 are students who have
completed their 12th standard during the current year from a
school affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education
(CBSE). They have applied to the Commissioner for Entrance
Examinations for admission to engineering courses for the
ensuing academic year. The third petitioner is a registered
association of the managements of CBSE Schools in the State.
It is stated by the petitioners that due to Covid-19 pandemic,
the qualifying examination was not conducted by the CBSE
during the current year, whereas owing to the very same
reason, the qualifying examination was conducted by the State
Board in a liberalised manner. According to the petitioners,
insofar as the qualifying examination was not conducted by the
CBSE, the students who are applying for admission to
engineering courses on the basis of the notional marks
awarded to them would be prejudiced in their rankings, if they
are treated at par with the candidates who are applying for
admission on the strength of the marks obtained by them in
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..16..
the qualifying examination conducted by the State Boards in a
liberalised manner. It is alleged that though the petitioners
have brought this anomaly to the notice of the Government by
way of representations, no action is taken on the same. The
petitioners, therefore, seek directions to the State Government
to give admission to engineering courses for the ensuing
academic year based on the scores of the candidates in the
entrance examination alone.
4. Petitioners 1 and 2 in W.P.(C) No.12788 of 2021
are students who have completed their 12th standard from a
school affiliated to the Council for the Indian School Certificate
Examinations (CISCE). They have also applied to the
Commissioner for Entrance Examinations for admission to
engineering courses for the ensuing academic year. The third
petitioner is a registered association of the managements of
the schools affiliated to the CISCE in the State. As in the case
of W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021, on similar pleadings, the
petitioners in this case also seek direction to the State
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..17..
Government to give admission to engineering courses for the
ensuing academic year based on the scores of the candidates
in the entrance examination alone.
5. Petitioners in W.P.(C) No.14996 of 2021 are
students who have completed their 12 th standard from a school
affiliated to the CBSE and applied to the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations for admission to engineering courses
for the ensuing academic year. They also seek the very same
relief sought for by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021.
In addition, they seek a declaration that the Clauses in Ext.P3
prospectus providing for weightage for the marks secured by
the candidates in their qualifying examination are violative of
the fundamental rights guaranteed to them under Articles 14
and 21 of the Constitution of India.
6. Petitioner in W.P.(C) No.18774 of 2021 is also a
student who has completed the 12th standard from a school
affiliated to the CBSE and applied to the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations for admission to engineering course for
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..18..
the ensuing academic year. He also seeks the very same relief
sought for by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021 on
similar pleadings.
7. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.17270 of 2021 is a
student who has completed the 12th standard from a school
affiliated to the CISCE and applied to the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations for admission to engineering course for
the ensuing academic year. It is stated by the petitioner that
since qualifying examination was not conducted by the CISCE
during the current year, marks have been awarded to the
students based on a Scheme formulated by the CISCE which
has been approved by the Apex Court in terms of the order
passed in W.P.(C) Nos.522 and 636 of 2021 on 22.06.2021. It is
also stated that the aforesaid Scheme provides that the
candidates, for whom the marks awarded in terms of the
Scheme are not acceptable, are entitled to improve the marks
by undertaking an improvement examination; that the
petitioner has undertaken the improvement examination for
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..19..
one subject invoking the said provision in the Scheme and that
the results of the improvement examination undertaken by the
petitioner are yet to be published. It is alleged by the petitioner
that in the meanwhile, the Commissioner for Entrance
Examinations is taking steps to finalise the rank list for
admission and if the rank list is finalised before publication of
the results of the improvement examination undertaken by
her, the petitioner will not be considered for admission for the
ensuing academic year. The petitioner, therefore, seeks
directions to the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations to
refrain from finalising the rank list for admission before the
declaration of results of the improvement examination
undertaken by the petitioner.
8. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19046 of 2021 is a
student who has completed 12th standard from a school
affiliated to the CBSE and applied to the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations for admission to engineering course for
the ensuing academic year. The case set out by the petitioner
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..20..
in this writ petition is identical to the case of the petitioner in
W.P.(C) No.17270 of 2021. She also seeks direction to the State
Government to refrain from finalising the rank list for
admission to engineering courses until the results of the
improvement examination undertaken by her are announced
and a week thereafter so as to enable her to make available
the marks to the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations.
9. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of
the State Government in W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021. The stand
taken by the State Government in the counter affidavit is that
since the marks have been awarded to the students by all
Boards who have not conducted the qualifying examinations
based on the Schemes formulated by them, there is no
impropriety in following the same procedure that was followed
in the previous years for admission to engineering courses for
the ensuing academic year also.
10. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners,
the learned Additional Advocate General as also the learned
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..21..
Standing Counsel for the All India Council for Technical
Education (AICTE).
11. The submissions made by the learned counsel
for the petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.12412, 12788, 14996 and
18774 of 2021, in essence, were that insofar as the qualifying
examinations were not conducted by the CBSE and CISCE, the
provision in the prospectus for giving weightage for the marks
secured by the candidates in the qualifying examination has
become redundant and unworkable and the same cannot
therefore be enforced. In other words, according to the learned
counsel, the notional marks awarded to the candidates by the
Boards cannot be the basis for awarding weightage for
admission to professional courses. It was the submission of the
learned counsel that if weightage is given to the candidates on
that basis, the conduct of the Government would be wholly
discriminatory for having treated the candidates who could
undertake the qualifying examination and who could not
undertake the qualifying examination alike. In order to bring
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..22..
home the point that the conduct of the State Government in
giving weightage based on the notional marks awarded by the
Boards is arbitrary, the learned counsel for the petitioners in
W.P.(C) No.14996 of 2021 has relied on the decisions of the
Apex court in Islamic Academy of Education and another
v. State of Karnataka and others, (2003) 6 SCC 697 and
Sanjay Singh and another v. U.P. Public Service
Commission, Allahabad and another, (2007) 3 SCC 720.
The learned counsel has also relied on the decision of the
Division Bench of this Court in Kerala Self Financing
Engineering College Managements Association v. State
of Kerala and others, 2016 (4) KLT 1018. In addition, the
learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.12412
of 2021 argued that insofar as the qualifying examination was
conducted by the State Board in a liberalised manner, the
marks secured by those students who have undertaken the
qualifying examination conducted by the State Board cannot
be standardised at all with the marks awarded to the
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..23..
candidates by the Boards who have not conducted the
qualifying examination. In order to show that the qualifying
examination was conducted by the State Board in a liberalised
manner, the learned Senior Counsel has brought to my
attention the question paper set for one of the examinations
conducted by the State Board in such a fashion that a
candidate who would answer 50% of the questions would get
100% marks.
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners in W.P.
(C) Nos.17270 and 19046 of 2021 contended that in the light
of the order passed by the Apex Court in W.P.(C) Nos.522 and
636 of 2021 dated 22.6.2021, which is produced by the
petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19046 of 2021 as Ext.P2, the
petitioners in those cases are entitled to improve the marks
awarded to them in terms of the Schemes formulated by the
CBSE and CISCE. It was argued by the learned counsel that the
Schemes also provide that if a candidate opts for
improvement, the marks secured by him/her in the
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..24..
improvement examination alone will be reckoned as the marks
secured in the qualifying examination. According to the learned
counsel, insofar as the State Government has decided to give
weightage for the marks notionally awarded to the candidates
in the qualifying examination in terms of the Schemes
formulated by the respective Boards, the right to opt for
improvement being part of the Schemes, rank list cannot be
prepared for admission without affording those students who
have applied for improvement an opportunity to make
available their marks for securing admission.
13. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate
General argued that insofar as marks have been awarded to
the candidates by the Boards who could not conduct the
qualifying examination during the current year based on the
Schemes formulated by them as approved by the Apex Court,
there is nothing wrong in giving weightage for the said marks
in giving admission after standardising the same. It was
asserted by the learned Additional Advocate General that
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..25..
insofar as a process of standardisation is provided for in the
prospectus, the fact that the qualifying examination conducted
by the State Board for the current year was liberal does not
make any difference. As far as W.P.(C) Nos.17270 and 19046 of
2021 are concerned, the learned Additional Advocate General
pointed out that going by the scheme approved by the AICTE,
admission for the ensuing year are to be closed on or before
25.10.2021. It was pointed out that it is having regard to the
said outer time limit fixed by the AICTE that the last date for
providing the marks of the candidates in the qualifying
examination was fixed as 17.09.2021 and if the said date is
extended, the admission process cannot be concluded before
25.10.2021. It was also submitted by the learned Additional
Advocate General that if AICTE enlarges the time limit fixed for
completing the admission process by two weeks, the State
Government has no objection in granting time to the
petitioners in these cases for making available their marks in
the qualifying examinations. The learned Additional Advocate
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..26..
General has also pointed out that there may not be any
impediment for the AICTE in enlarging the time limit fixed by
them for closing the admission as they had enlarged the time
limit during the previous academic year having regard to the
pandemic situation prevailed in the country.
14. The learned Standing Counsel for the AICTE
pointed out that the outer limit for closing the admission is
fixed by the AICTE based on the directions issued by the Apex
Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust and others v. All
India Council for Technical Education and others, (2013)
3 SCC 385, and the outer time limit for closure of the
admission cannot therefore be enlarged without obtaining
orders from the Apex Court. On a query from the Court, it was
clarified by the learned Standing Counsel that the outer time
limit for closure of admission was enlarged last year after
obtaining orders from the Apex Court in the said case.
15. I have perused the pleadings of the parties
and examined the arguments raised by their learned counsel
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..27..
at the Bar.
16. It is seen that weightage is given for the marks
secured by the candidates in their qualifying examinations,
after standardising the same, while preparing the rank list for
admission, with a view to ensure that the assessment of merit
of each candidate is, to the extent possible, realistic and
correct. In Kerala Self Financing Engineering College
Managements Association, this Court has observed that
unless the scores obtained by the candidates in the entrance
examination and the marks in their qualifying examination are
taken into account, there cannot be a proper assessment of
the merit of the candidates. In other words, the petitioners
cannot be heard to contend that the provision in the
prospectus providing for weightage for the marks secured by
the candidates in their qualifying examinations is bad for any
reason. It is all the more so since the said provision has been
part of the prospectus for the last so many years and it has
passed the test of time.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..28..
17. As noted, the main contention of the
petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.12412, 12788, 14996 and 18774 of
2021 is that insofar as the qualifying examinations were not
conducted by the CBSE and CISCE, the provision in the
prospectus for giving weightage for the marks secured by the
candidates in the qualifying examination has become
redundant and unworkable and the same cannot be enforced.
True, the provision for weightage for the marks awarded to the
candidates in their qualifying examinations has been made in
the prospectus on the assumption that qualifying examinations
would be conducted by all Boards in the current year as well.
The State Government does not dispute the fact that qualifying
examinations were not conducted by the CBSE and CISCE
during the current year on account of the Covid-19 pandemic.
The State Government does not also dispute that the marks
awarded to the candidates by the said Boards during the
current year are notional and arrived at based on the Schemes
formulated by them which have been approved by the Apex
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..29..
Court. It is seen that the qualifying examinations could not be
conducted by the CBSE and CISCE on account of the extra
ordinary situation prevailing in the country due to Covid-19
pandemic and it is with a view to ensure that the prospects of
the students shall not be affected on account of the inability of
the Boards in conducting the qualifying examinations, the said
Boards have formulated Schemes for awarding notional marks
to the students based on the formula arrived at by the experts
in the field. The said marks, in the absence of any contrary
intention in the Schemes and in the order of the Apex Court
approving the same, are liable to be treated as the marks
secured by the students in their qualifying examinations for all
purposes, including weightage for admission to professional
courses. It is all the more so since it is provided for in the
Schemes formulated by the Boards aforesaid that there is no
compulsion for the students to accept the notional marks
awarded to them and they are free to undertake improvement
examinations. In other words, as far as the candidates are
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..30..
concerned, if they have not chosen to undertake the
examinations specially conducted for improving the notional
marks awarded to them, they cannot be heard to contend that
the notional marks cannot be used for all purposes or for
weightage in the matter of preparing rank list for admission to
professional courses. In other words, the contention of the
petitioners that the notional marks awarded to them cannot be
reckoned for weightage, is liable to be rejected, even while
accepting the argument that the provision for weightage is
made in the prospectus on the assumption that qualifying
examinations would be conducted by all Boards for the current
year. For the aforesaid reasons, I am inclined to hold that even
the contention raised by the petitioners in the writ petitions
that in the absence of any qualifying examination for a section
of candidates seeking admission, standardisation of marks
awarded to the candidates is not workable, is unsustainable,
even while accepting the argument that the standardisation
process was conceived and incorporated in the prospectus on
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..31..
the assumption that qualifying examinations would be
conducted by all Boards for the current year.
18. Coming to the contention raised by the
learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.12412
of 2021 that since the qualifying examination for the current
year was conducted liberally by the State Board, the marks
awarded to the candidates in their qualifying examination
cannot be standardised with the marks awarded to the
candidates by other Boards by any process of standardisation,
much less the process of standardisation provided for in the
prospectus, it is to be noted that standardisation, as it is well
known, is only a process of equalising. 100% precision cannot
be expected in a process of standardisation. The
standardisation process is adopted in the context of admission
to a course only in situations where treating the applicants
alike would go against the principles of equality. Clause
9.7.4(b)(iii) of the prospectus dealing with the formula for
standardisation of the marks secured by the candidates in their
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..32..
qualifying examination reads thus:
"(iii) The formula for standardisation as has been
approved by the Expert Committee constituted vide G.O.
(Rt) No.1758/2011/H.Edn. dated 03.11.2011: The marks
secured by a student in the qualifying examination from
any Board will be standardised with respect to the
statistical parameters such as Global Mean and Global
Standard Deviation.
The standardised mark YBG of a candidate of the stream
(B) standardised with respect to the global reference
stream (G) for the subject is
YBG = MG + SG XBj - MBj
S Bj
Where MBj and SBj denote respectively the Mean and
Standard Deviation of the marks out of 100 of all students
who have passed in a subject of the final year of
qualifying examination of any stream (B) of the year j and
XBj is the mark of a candidate out of 100 for the subject in
the stream (B) of the year j.
The Global Mean (MG) of a subject is the combined
average of the marks of that subject out of hundred of all
students who have passed in that subject (Mathematics,
Physics and Chemistry/Computer
Science/Biotechnology/Biology as the case may be), of
the final year of the Qualifying Examination of Kerala HSE,
Kerala VHSE, CBSE and CISCE Boards taken together for
the period from 2009 to 2021. The Global Standard
Deviation (SG) of the subject is the combined standard
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..33..
deviation of marks of that subject out of hundred of all
students who have passed in that subject (Mathematics,
Physics and Chemistry/Computer
Science/Biotechnology/Biology as the case may be), of
the final year of the Qualifying Examination of Kerala HSE,
Kerala VHSE, CBSE and CISCE Boards taken together for
the period from 2009 to 2021."
As evident from the extracted clause, the formula provided
therein for standardisation has been approved by an expert
committee constituted by the Government. Even this process
of standardisation has been part of the prospectus for the
previous entrance examinations and has passed the test of
time. Though the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
assert that the marks secured by the candidates under the
State Board cannot be standardised with the marks awarded to
the candidates of other Boards for the qualifying examination
conducted by the State Board was too liberal, the learned
counsel did not demonstrate as to why the formula cannot be
applied for standardisation in a situation of this nature. In other
words, the aforesaid contention of the learned Senior Counsel
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..34..
for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021 is also liable to
be rejected.
19. Coming to the decisions cited by the learned
counsel for the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.14996 of 2021, the
proposition laid down by the Apex Court in Islamic Academy
of Education is that the merit for any purpose and in
particular for the purpose of admission to a professional
college is to be judged as far as possible on the basis of the
same or similar examinations. In other words, inter se merit
amongst the students similarly situated should be judged
applying the same norm or standard. Likewise, the proposition
laid down by the Apex Court in Sanjay Singh is that the
scaling techniques would be useful and effective only if the
distribution of marks in the batch of answer scripts sent to
each examiner is approximately the same as the distribution of
marks in the batch of answer scripts sent to every other
examiner. The proposition laid down by the Division Bench of
this Court in Kerala Self Financing Engineering College
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..35..
Managements Association is that the admission procedure
to the professional colleges has to be fair and should satisfy
the test of being transparent, merit based and non
exploitative. The propositions aforesaid, according to me, have
no application to the facts of the present cases.
20. Coming to W.P.(C) Nos.17270 and 19046 of
2021, as noted, the grievance of the petitioners concerns the
outer time limit prescribed by the Commissioner for Entrance
Examinations for providing the marks of the candidates applied
for admission to professional courses. It has come out that the
last date for providing the marks of the candidates is now fixed
as 17.09.2021. While the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.17270 of
2021 states that the result of the improvement examination
undertaken by her will be announced by the CISCE during the
penultimate week of September 2021, the stand of the
petitioner in W.P.(C) No.19046 of 2021 in this regard is that the
results of the improvement examinations undertaken by her
will be announced by the CBSE only during the last week of
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..36..
September 2021. It is seen from the materials on record that
Schemes have been formulated by CBSE and CISCE for
awarding marks in the qualifying examinations in such a
fashion that a candidate, to whom the marks awarded is not
acceptable, is entitled to undertake the improvement
examination. The Schemes also provides that if a candidate
undertakes improvement examination, the marks secured by
him/her in the improvement examination will be the one
considered as the marks in the qualifying examination. In other
words, as far as the candidates who have undertaken the
improvement examination are concerned, they are yet to be
awarded with the marks. As noted earlier, the Schemes have
been formulated by the CBSE and CISCE to award marks to the
candidates in the qualifying examinations as the respective
Boards were not able to conduct the qualifying examinations
on account of the Covid-19 pandemic so as to enable the
candidates to make use of the same for all practical purposes
as if the said marks were awarded after conducting the
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..37..
qualifying examinations. In other words, the objective behind
the formulation of the Schemes is that no candidate shall be
affected in any manner on account of the inability of the
Boards to conduct the qualifying examinations in the current
year. The provisions of the Schemes cannot therefore create
any impediment or bottleneck for any candidate in the matter
of their future prospects. In that view of the matter, according
to me, the conduct of the Commissioner for Entrance
Examinations in fixing outer time limit for providing the marks
of the candidates for the purpose of weightage before
announcement of the results of the improvement examinations
is arbitrary and violative of the right to equality guaranteed to
the candidates who have undertaken the improvement
examination.
21. As indicated, the difficulty expressed by the
learned Additional Advocate General in the matter of extending
the outer time limit fixed for providing the marks is on account
of the outer time limit fixed by the AICTE for closure of the
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..38..
admission in the current year. Since AICTE has taken the stand
that the outer time limit for closure of the admission cannot be
extended further in the light of the interdictions made by the
Apex Court in Parshvanath Charitable Trust, the only option
left is to direct the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations to
finalise the allotment process within a shorter period.
In the result, W.P.(C)Nos.12412, 12788, 14996 and
18774 of 2021 are dismissed. W.P.(C) Nos.17270 and 19046 of
2021 are allowed in part directing the Commissioner for
Entrance Examinations, Government of Kerala to enlarge the
time limit fixed for providing marks of the candidates applied
for admission to engineering courses till the marks of the
candidates who have undertaken improvement examinations
in terms of the Schemes formulated by the CBSE and CISCE are
published by the respective Boards and two days thereafter.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE
rkj
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..39..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12412/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE QUESTION PAPER FOR THE
SUBJECT PHYSICS OF THE SECOND YEAR
HIGHER SECONDARY EXAMINATION, MARCH
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
NO.CEE/3600/KEAM-2021/TA2 ISSUED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 31.05.2021
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
PROSPECTUS FOR KEAM 2021 ISSUSED BY THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED
BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE
RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2 DATED 11.06.2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF
PLUS TWO RESULT OF KERALA HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION IN MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..40..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12788/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHYSICS QUESTION
PAPER OF 2ND YEAR HIGHER SECONDARY
EXAMINATION, MARCH 2021
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION
NO.CEE/3600/KEAM-2021/TA2 DATED
31.5.2021
Exhibit P3 THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE PROSPECTUS
OF KEAM-2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
11.6.2021 PREFERRED BY THE 3RD
PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF
THE PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION TO
PROFESSIONAL DEGREE COURSES 2020-21
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..41..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14996/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE IDENTITY
CARD/CERTIFICATE SHOWING THE
PETITIONERS TO BE STUDENTS OF THE
RESPECTIVE SCHOOLS.
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
THE NOTIFICATION DATED 17.06.2021
ISSUED BY CBSE FOR TABULATION OF MARKS
FOR CLASS XII BOARD EXAMINATIONS 2021.
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS REPORT
PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DATED
15.07.2021.
Exhibit P4 THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PROSPECTUS-
KEAM 2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL POLICY 2020.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS REPORT
PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DATED
03.06.2021.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..42..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17270/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CISCE SCHEME FOR ICSE
CLASS X, AND ISC (CLASS XII) FOR THE
YEAR 2021 AS PUBLISHED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 20.06.2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
22.06.2021 IN WRIT PETITION CIVIL
522/2021 BY THE HONOURABLE SUPREME
COURT.
Exhibit P3 A SCREENSHOT OF THE CLASS XII MARKS OF
THE PETITIONER UPLOADED BY THE FOURTH
RESPONDENT ON THEIR WEBSITE.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION PREFERRED
BY THE PETITIONER TO HER SCHOOL DATED
03.08.2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE DOWNLOADED MARKS CARD
FROM THE WEBSITE OF THE 4TH
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ADMISSION CARD OF THE
PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE FOURTH
RESPONDENT FOR IMPROVEMENT
EXAMINATION.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
KEAM PROSPECTUS 2021.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT ON
KAUMUDI ONLINE DATED 12.08.2021.
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
13.08.2021.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..43..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18774/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHYSICS QUESTION
PAPER OF 2ND YEAR HIGHER SECONDARY
EXAMINATION, MARCH 2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.
CEE/3600/KEAM-2021/TA2 DATED
31.05.2021.
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PORTION OF
THE PROSPECTUS OF KEAM 2021 ISSUED BY
2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
11.06.2021 OF KERALA C.B.S.E SCHOOL
MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION TO THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE KEAM ADMIT CARD OF
THE PETITIONER.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..44..
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19046/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
ASSESSMENT POLICY FRAMED IN LIEU OF
CLASS XII PUBLIC EXAMINATION PUBLISHED
BY THE CBSE VIDE NOTIFICATION
NO.CBSE/CE/2021 DATED 17.06.2021.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
22.06.2021 OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT
IN WPC NO.522 & 636 OF 2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED
08.08.2021 ISSUED BY THE CBSE.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CLASS XII RESULTS OF
THE PETITIONER BASED ON EXT.P1
ASSESSMENT POLICY.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF
KEAM-2021 PROSPECTUS.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT ON 13.08.2021.
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH
RESPONDENT ON 13.08.2021.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
06.09.2021 OF THE HON'BLE APEX COURT
IN WPC NO.925 OF 2021.
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR
NO.AICTE/AB/ACADEMIC CALENDAR/2021-22
DATED 10.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE AICTE.
W.P.(C) No.12412 of 2021
& con. cases ..45..
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONERS HALL
TICKET FOR THE CLASS XII CBSE
IMPROVEMENT EXAMINATIONS.
Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION
NO.CEE/3600/KEAM-2021/TA2 DATED
09.09.2021 ISSUED BY THE 5TH
RESPONDENT.
