IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2011 / 26TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 7660 of 2011(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- REMYA M.M., AGED 17 YEARS, D/O.MURALEEDHARAN M.V., MORIYAKKATT, CHERAI P.O., ERNAKULAM, (REPRESENTED BY FATHER (GUARDIAN) MURALEEDHARAN M.V. AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.VELUKKUTTY). BY ADV. SRI.P.V.MOHANAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATION (FOR ADMISSION TO PROFESSIONAL DEGREE COURSES) OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATION, FIFTH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER, ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION, CHANDALOK BUILDING, JANA PATH, NEW DELHI. R1 & R2 BY ADVOCATE GENERAL SRI. K.P. DANDAPANI, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. ROSHAN D. ALEXANDER. R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMURTHY,S.C, A.I.C.T.E. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/10/2011, ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 6981 OF 2011 AND CONNECTED CASES,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.7660/2011-F: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE RELEVANT PORTIONS OF THE PROSPECTUS G.O.M.S. NO.403/2010/H/EDN. DTD. 28/12/2010. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD. 29/01/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE GUIDELINES DTD. 15/06/92. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE GUIDELINES DTD. 20/05/94. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES & EXHIBITS:- ANNEXURE R1.A: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S SON IN W.P.(C).NO.6981/2011. ANNEXURE R1.B: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.7660/2011. ANNEXURE R1.C: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE P.1. IN W.P.(C). NO.19457/2011. ANNEXURE R1.D: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE P.2. IN W.P.(C). NO.19457/2011. ANNEXURE R1.E: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE P.3. IN W.P.(C). NO.19457/2011. ANNEXURE R1.F: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE P.4. IN W.P.(C). NO.19457/2011. ANNEXURE R1.G: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE P.5. IN W.P.(C). NO.19457/2011. ANNEXURE R1.H: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20456/2011. ANNEXURE R1.I: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S SON IN W.P. (C).NO.21114/2011. ANNEXURE R1.J: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.19870/2011. ANNEXURE R1.K: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20692/2011. ANNEXURE R1.L: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20728/2011. ANNEXURE R1.M: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER IN W.P.(C).NO.20729/2011. W.P.(C).NO.7660/2011-F: ANNEXURE R1.N: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20730/2011. ANNEXURE R1.O: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20731/2011. ANNEXURE R1.P: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER IN W.P.(C).NO.20732/2011. ANNEXURE R1.Q: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20733/2011. ANNEXURE R1.R: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER IN W.P.(C). NO.20734/2011. ANNEXURE R1.S: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S SON IN W.P.(C).NO.20735/2011. ANNEXURE R1.T: COPY OF THE MARKS/DATA SHEET OF THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER IN W.P.(C).NO.20736/2011. EXT.R2.A: COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR 2011 ISSUED BY THE KERALA CATHOLIC ENGINEERING COLLEGE MANAGEMENTS' ASSOCIATION. EXT.R2.B: COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE DTD. 01/08/2011. EXT.R2.C: COPY OF THE SCORE CARD OF THE PETITIONER'S SON. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Prv. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag.CJ. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. .................................................................... W.P(C). Nos.7660, 6981, 19457, 19870, 20456, 20692, 20728, 20729, 20730, 20731, 20732, 20733, 20734, 20735, 20736, 21114, 22232 & 27025 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 18th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. All these WP(C)s are filed by students who have passed 12th standard under the CBSE or ICSE syllabus and participated in the entrance examination conducted by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations in Kerala for admissions to engineering courses for the year 2011. Grievance of the petitioners is that ranks obtained by them in the entrance examination got lowered on account of addition of adjusted marks in the optional subjects made by the Entrance Examination Commissioner while preparing the final rank list based on which preferential allotments were made for admissions to various engineering subjects in the merit quota. 2. We have heard learned Senior counsel Shri.K.Ramakumar and other learned counsel appearing for the WP(C) Nos. 7660, 6981 of 2011 & connected cases 2 petitioners and the learned Advocate General for the respondents. 3. Admittedly rank list was prepared and admissions were given until 2010 just based on the marks obtained in the competitive entrance examinations. However, when the prospectus was issued for entrance examinations conducted for admissions in the year 2011, the same provided for addition of marks in the three subjects (mathematics, physics and chemistry) scored in the qualifying examination to the marks obtained in the entrance examinations in a pattern after normalisation of the marks obtained under the State Syllabus and the Central Syllabus. The contention of the petitioners is that as a consequence of addition of adjusted or normalised marks there is substantial fall in the rank list of all the petitioners and as a result of the same, they could not get admissions in the merit quota in the subjects or in the colleges of their choice. On behalf of the respondents, learned Advocate General contended that since students are drawn from three streams, two from central syllabus and one from WP(C) Nos. 7660, 6981 of 2011 & connected cases 3 state syllabus, the marks as such cannot be added but a formula was adopted for normalisation of marks obtained in the same subjects. According to him, the detailed formula for adjustment of marks was stated in the prospectus itself and all the petitioners participated in the entrance examination are well aware that admissions will be made based on readjustment of rank obtained in the entrance examination by adding normalised marks in terms of the prospectus. So much so, the objection raised is against the maintainability of the WP (C)s at this time when the admissions are over. 4. Learned Senior counsel Shri.K.Ramakumar and other counsel appearing for the petitioners demonstrated before us the method adopted for normalisation as irrational and unscientific and the result is that students have lost their positions in the ranks obtained by them in the entrance examination. Even though we feel the matter requires serious consideration because prima facie the adjustments and normalisation do not appear to us to be rational or scientific, we do not proceed to examine this because we are unable to WP(C) Nos. 7660, 6981 of 2011 & connected cases 4 grant relief to the petitioners even if their arguments are found tenable. This is because of the fact that over 15000 students are admitted by re-arranging rank list under the formula stated in the prospectus and as of now, even classes have commenced in all the engineering colleges. Even though 1000s of students who passed out the 12th standard under the CBSE or ICSE syllabus would have got admissions by reckoning the normalised or adjusted marks, only 18 of them, the petitioners herein, have chosen to challenge the same. We do not want to upset the admissions given to over 15000 students at this stage on petitions filed only as many as 18 students. Further it is to be noted that almost all these petitioners have also joined to engineering studies in various colleges in Kerala and as of now they are pursuing their studies. Since the relief if granted will destabilise the entire admissions given to over 15000 students, it is not fair or reasonable for this Court to interfere with the admissions, whatever may be the grounds raised now. What we notice is that this unusual procedure is adopted for the first time and WP(C) Nos. 7660, 6981 of 2011 & connected cases 5 the impression given in the Court is that this method is not going to be continued for the next year. So much so the issue raised is only academic in nature and therefore we do not propose to consider the detailed grounds raised to substantiate the irrationality or unscientific basis adopted for normalisation or adjustment of actual marks obtained in the three qualifying subjects. If we allow the petitions on the grounds raised by them and upset the rank list, we are afraid the same will lead to injustice to the entire student community, who have joined various courses in various colleges and are pursuing their studies. We, therefore, dismiss all the WP(C)s without going to the merits of the case. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg