1996 Supreme(Ker) 296
Kerala High Court
P.SHANMUGAM
Reshmi George - Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala - Respondent
Decided On : 08/21/1996
Mathew John, for Petitioner; Govt. Pleader (K. K. Ravindranath), for Respondents.
Headnote:
Entrance Examination - Results Challenge - Professional Courses - [LESS NUMBER OF QUESTIONS, WRONG ANSWERS, ORGANIZED COPYING, DISTRICT DISCRIMINATION, DELAY IN PUBLICATION] - [Section 8 of Chapter 8 of the Brochure, Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh BhupeshKumar Sheth, (1984) 4 SCC 27 : (AIR 1984 SC 1543), R.S. Joshi v. Ajit Mills Ltd. (1977) 4 SCC 98 : (AIR 1977 SC 2279)] - The court discussed the challenge made by the petitioners against the validity of the Entrance Examination, including issues related to the number of questions, wrong answers, organized copying, district discrimination, and delay in publication. The court referred to Section 8 of Chapter 8 of the Brochure and the case law in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh BhupeshKumar Sheth, (1984) 4 SCC 27 : (AIR 1984 SC 1543) and R.S. Joshi v. Ajit Mills Ltd. (1977) 4 SCC 98 : (AIR 1977 SC 2279) to analyze the fairness and integrity of the examination process and the handling of irregularities.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitions challenge the results of the common Entrance Examination held for admission to the Professional Courses 1996-97 and for connected and consequential reliefs. The challenge is mainly based on issues related to the number of questions, wrong answers, organized copying, district discrimination, and delay in publication. The petitions are filed by candidates as well as societies as a public interest litigation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that most of the issues raised by the petitioners were not substantiated and ruled against the petitioners, except for the issue related to the selection of 9 candidates for Engineering courses without writing the Mathematics paper. The court directed the respondents to take immediate steps to cancel their selection or admission if any made, in accordance with the law.
Issues: The issues raised in the case include the validity of the Entrance Examination, challenges related to the number of questions, wrong answers, organized copying, district discrimination, and delay in publication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the analysis of the fairness and integrity of the examination process, handling of irregularities, and the legal principles established in the case law referred to in the judgment.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the Original Petitions accordingly, ruling against the petitioners, except for the issue related to the selection of 9 candidates for Engineering courses without writing the Mathematics paper, for which the court directed the respondents to take immediate steps to cancel their selection or admission if any made, in accordance with the law.
All these writ petitions are filed challenging the results of common Entrance Examination held for admission to the Professional Courses 1996-97 and for connected and consequential reliefs. The Controller of Examinations who is an authority to conduct Entrance Examination for admission to various Professional Courses such as Engineering, Medical and Agricultural Courses notified for the examination for admission to these courses on 5-3-1996. Applications were called for the said admission through a common Entrance Examination for selection of candidates. A detailed brochure issued by the office of the Controller of Entrance Examinations and the prospectus issued by the Director of Technical Education set out in detail the procedure of applying and the scheme of the Entrance Examination and the selection. As per the programme notified by the authorities, the Entrance Examinations were conducted on l8th and 19 May, 1996. The rank list was published on 24-6-1996. The interview proposed to be held for admission on 12-7-1996 was postponed and held on and from 25-7-1996.
2. The challenge made by the petitioners against the validity of the Entrance Examination is mainly on the following grounds: (i) The question papers in one of the Kottayam Centres contained lesser number of questions than given to other candidates and, therefore, the examination is discriminatory and illegal. (ii) Question booklet contained wrong answers for certain questions. (iii) Organised copying in the Entrance Examination with the assistance and connivance of certain coaching centres in Trivandrum and Kottayam. (iv) Candidates of Malabar and Wayanad Districts are discriminated. (v) Extraordinary delay in publication of the results and the postponement of interviews.
3. The writ petitions are filed by candidates as well as the societies as a public interest litigation. Apart from espousing the cause of the petitioners, they seek for a general directions to quash the entire results of the Entrance Examinations. The State of Kerala, the lst respondents, and the Controller of Entrance Examination have filed counters and additional counter-affidavits. I have heard the matter in extenso, gone through the documents and answer sheets.
4. Professional courses like Medicine, Engineering, Agricultural and allied subjects are most sought after by students these days. As the demand is l0 times the available seats, the selection has to be highly competitive. With the goal of getting a seat, the preparation starts even from the 10th standard and naturally nobody would like their efforts being defeated in the selection except by merit. The Government of Kerala has evolved a scheme of selection for the professional courses only by common Entrance Examination with objective type of questions and evaluation of the answers by computerised system. The system is considered as fast, accurate and reliable. However, in view of the dispensation of academic marks, the Entrance Examinations have secured the maximum attention and preparations. It is for the Government and academicians to choose and decide the correct mode and the need of proper selection. Consequent on the concentration of the Entrance Examinations, it is necessary to see that the system does not leave any scope for manipulation. Any weak link in the chain of this system is likely to be exploited to the detriment of many deserving and hard working candidates. Therefore, the Original Petitions filed by public spirited persons cannot be blamed for having filed without materials and without due cause. There are very many areas of operation giving scope for manipulations, unless manned by persons of proven integrity. Hence it has become necessary to go into each and every allegations to satisfy that there is nothing wrong in the selection.
5. The salient features of this system is as follows :
(i) Candidates are provided with a set of questions with five suggested answers and