KEAM results row: SC defers all appeal hearing to tomorrow, seeks clarity from Kerala govt
The court emphasizes it will not disrupt the ongoing admission process while acknowledging the uncertainty surrounding admissions nationwide.
The court emphasizes it will not disrupt the ongoing admission process while acknowledging the uncertainty surrounding admissions nationwide.
The court emphasizes it will not disrupt the ongoing admission process while acknowledging the uncertainty surrounding admissions nationwide.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Kerala government to clarify whether it intends to challenge the High Court’s verdict in the KEAM (Kerala Engineering Architecture Medical) admission case. The Bench directed the state’s counsel to present a clear stand on the matter and adjourned the hearing of the petitions to Wednesday.
During the hearing, counsel representing CBSE students pointed out that the deadline to submit options is August 2. In response, the court stated that it had no intention of disrupting the ongoing admission process. It also observed that the prevailing uncertainty over admissions was causing serious problems across the country.
Appearing for Kerala syllabus students, advocates Prashant Bhushan and P S Sulfikkar argued that the state government had the authority, as per the prospectus, to revise policies and make decisions related to admissions. They claimed that CBSE students consistently secured top ranks in previous years’ lists and that the discrepancy in proportionality calculation had led to the current issue. They said the government’s decision to make changes was based on the recommendations of an expert committee.
The lawyers also contended that only Kerala syllabus students who scored 100 per cent marks managed to reach the top of the rank list, and that the state’s intervention was an attempt to correct this imbalance.
However, appearing for CBSE students, advocate Aljo K Joseph argued that the government’s last-minute changes to the prospectus, made just an hour before the publication of the rank list, were arbitrary and unlawful.