ABHISHEK T.M. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Deeply aggrieved by the reduction of grace marks for sports quota in the KEAM-2020 examination being conducted by the Government of Kerala, the petitioners who are students with achievements in sports, are before this Court. They seek to quash Ext.P4 and P4(a) and also Ext.P1 to the extent it vests powers on the Government for modification/addition/deletion of the prospectus without specifying conditions of circumstances under which such modification/addition/deletion can be effected.

(2.) The petitioners are applicants for admission to professional degree courses. Admission to the said courses are made through the examination called KEAM-2020. As per Clause 5.2.16 of Ext.P1 prospectus governing admission, the petitioners are eligible to get 61 marks. Ext.P1 was issued on 30.01.2020. On 10.02.2020, the Government of Kerala issued Ext.P4 order revising the existing criteria for allotting grace marks for sports quota admission to professional degree courses in Kerala. By serial No.53 to the said GO, the grace mark allocable to the candidates belonging to the sports category to which the petitioners belong, was reduced to 48. The petitioners contend that prospectus to admission to a professional course is an important document and once it is issued and acted upon, the selection criteria mentioned therein cannot be altered. Clause 1.6 of Ext.P1 prospectus which provides that it is subject to the modification/addition/deletion as may be deemed necessary by the Government, vests unfettered powers on the Government, having no guidelines for exercise of such powers.

(3.) Dr. K.P. Pradeep, the counsel representing the petitioners would point out that by Ext.P4, reduction has been made only in respect of four items connected with School Games Federation of India (SGFI) performance/participation. For all other items, the marks have either been increased or retained. The reduction of marks in respect of the category to which the petitioners belong is therefore discriminatory. Though the petitioners have filed Ext.P5 representation addressed to the Secretary to Department of Higher Education and other competent authorities, they have not paid their attention to the grievance of the petitioners.