9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 590X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , aggregating to 231. The Board had fixed the cut off marks for admission as 37 for Maths, 48 for Physics and 55 for Chemistry and the aggregate cut off marks as 154. As first appellant did not secure the minimum of 55 marks in chemistry he was not qualified, even though his aggregate in the three subjects was very high. 3. The second appellant wrote a letter dated 5.9.2006 to all the IIT Chairmen/Directors alleging anomalies and inherent contradictions in the selection process. He alleged that the cut off marks were fixed arbitrarily and with malafides in a manner that a student such as the first appellant with 231 marks was found to be not qualified whereas a student who got aggregate marks of 154 was found to have qualified. The appellants also filed several applications under the Right to Information Act 2005 and collected considerable data. The appellants claim that when they sought information about the procedure for computation of cut off marks for JEE 2006 the organising Chairman, JEE 2006 gave two different versions at different points of time. 4. The first response given by the Organizing Chairman, JEE 2006 on 14.5.2007 read as follows : "Procedure for computation of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing reliefs, apart from several consequential reliefs : (a) To quash the selection and merit list of admissions to IIT/ITBHU/ISM on the basis of JEE 2006 as it was prepared on the basis of imposition of illogical and cut off marks in three subjects without any rational basis; (b) to prepare and publish fresh chemistry marks for admissions to IITs in regard to JEE 2006 after making appropriate corrections in evaluation by adjusting the wrong evaluation and on that basis prepare and publish fresh merit list for admission to IITs/ITBHU/ISM in regard to JEE 2006. 6. A learned Single Judge dismissed the said writ petition holding as follows : (a) The appellants could not challenge the procedure for determination of cut off in JEE 2006 as they had given a signed declaration that the decision of JAB regarding the admission to be final and they would abide by the said decision. (b) The respondents had justified as to the manner of arriving at the cut off marks for Chemistry in JEE 2006 and it was within the domain of the Joint Admission Board to decide upon the procedure for determining such cut off and there was no material to show that the procedure adopted was flawed or arbitrary. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provided by IIT- Kharagpur. 2. Cut-off marks in Mathematics, Physics, and Chemistry: Mathematics Physics Chemistry IIT-Kharagpur data 37 48 55 Category A of this study 7 4 6 Category B of this study,provided for the sake of completeness -3 8 -6 In terms of cut-off marks, my findings do not agree at all with the data provided by IIT-Kharagpur. Since the procedure used by IIT-Kharagpur for the determination of the cut-off is the same as the computation I performed for candidates in Category A, a direct comparison is valid. 3. For the subject of Chemistry, following the formula provided by IIT-Kharagpur, the cut-off marks determined by my analysis is only 6, whereas it is 55 in the data provided by IIT-Kharagpur." 9. The JAB appointed a two member committee of IIT Directors (Mr. Gautam Barua, Director, IIT, Guwahati and Mr. Dewang Khakhar, Director, IIT, Bombay) to work out the cut-off marks for chemistry. They gave the following report dated 19.7.2009 : "The committee first of all noted that the issue of cut-off marks in each of the subjects of the examination, namely, Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics has been present in the JEE system for a nu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment is challenged in this appeal by special leave. 11. The question for consideration is whether the procedure adopted by the Board to arrive at the cut off marks for JEE 2006 is arbitrary and mala fide and whether the High Court ought to have interfered in the matter. 12. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the minutes of the meeting of JAB 2006 held on 17.9.2005 which laid down the procedure for holding the JEE 2006, furnished by the respondents, did not contain the cut off procedure for JEE 2006. It was submitted that the cut off procedure which was fixed before the examination was repeatedly changed after the examination and that the two different versions given by the Board at different points of time demonstrated that none of the procedures showed 55% as the chemistry cut off marks; that the procedure adopted was full of errors and defects; and that if the iterative procedure explained by the Board was implemented correctly, the effect would be to increasing the Maths cut off marks from 37 to 42 and decreasing Physics cut off marks from 48 to 44 and Chemistry cut off marks from 55 to 51. It was also contended that the Chemistry cut off marks were probably man ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation procedure for JEE 2006 and the Procedure for cut-off determination in JEE 2006 done by iterative process, followed by the Board. "Evaluation Procedure for JEE 2006 Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) conducted by the IITs for admission to the Under-graduate course in all the seven IITs, IT-BHU and ISM Dhanbad is considered to be the best and the toughest admission test in the world. This is primarily intended to attract the brightest of the young minds for education and research in engineering and technology in India. Joint Entrance Examination (JEE)-2006 was conducted on 9th April 2006 was one stage of examination as approved by the Joint Admission Board (JAB). In this examination, there were three question papers namely Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. Each question paper was objective type in nature to test the aptitude and comprehension ability of the candidates. Each question paper is a question-cum-answer book named as Question Paper Booklet (QPB). This question paper booklet has questions with a space for rough work and the answer sheet which is a machine gradable bar coded OMR sheet attached to the question paper at the end. This OMR has two parts i.e. Left Hand S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f mark of a subject = Mean of the marks for the subject - Standard deviation of the marks for the subject. The result has been rounded to the nearest integer. (iii) The mean and standard deviation of the aggregate marks are calculated for those candidates who score at least one mark in each subject. (iv)The aggregate cut-off mark is calculated as Aggregate cut-off = (Mean of aggregate marks - Standard deviation of Aggregate marks) rounded to nearest integer-- a positive number. The number selected for counseling (i.e. qualified in JEE-2006 for counseling) is 1.3 x the number of seats available in all participating Institutions. Each time 1 (one) mark is added to the mean-standard deviation of the aggregate marks and the number obtained is compared with the desired number. This process is continued until one arrives at the desired number to be called for counseling. PROCEDURE FOR RANKING: Based on the cut-off marks in the individual subjects as well as aggregate marks in the Examination, a common merit list will be prepared without any relaxed criteria. In addition, separate merit lists of candidates belonging to SC, ST and PD categories will be prepared with d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... again calculate by applying the cut off marks procedure with reference to the reduced number. By this process the cut off marks have been arrived at in regard to each subject for 5585 which was nearest to 5500. Thereafter taking the data set of the said 5585 shortlisted the aggregate cut off was determined by following iterative process : "Step 1 Total desired number of candidates to be called for counseling (including SC,ST and PD candidates) > 6307 (NTD). This number is disclosed in the Counseling Brochure sent to all the qualified candidates Step 2 Take dataset (N) obtained after arriving at the final subject cutoff marks. Step 3 Calculate Mean and Standard Deviation of the aggregate marks for dataset N. Step 4 Calculate aggregate cut-off of GE candidates by the formula: Aggregate cut-off (171) = mean of aggregate marks (212.555) - standard deviation of aggregate marks (41.30975). (Note : The value was rounded off to the nearest lower integer) Step 5 Calculate cut-off marks of SC/ST, PD by the formula: Subject cut-off of SC/ST = 0.3 x subject cut-off of GE candidates Aggregate cut-off of SC/ST = 0.6 x aggregate cut-off of GE candidates Subject cut-off of PD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns from individual institutions or students to permit courses of their choice, either for their convenience or to alleviate hardship or to provide better opportunities, or because they think that one course is equal to another, without realizing the repercussions on the field of technical education in general, it will lead to chaos in education and deterioration in standards of education. The role of statutory expert bodies on education and role of courts are well defined by a simple rule. If it is a question of educational policy or an issue involving academic matter, the courts keep their hands off. If any provision of law or principle of law has to be interpreted, applied or enforced, with reference to or connected with education, the courts will step in." This Court also repeatedly held that courts are not concerned with the practicality or wisdom of the policies but only illegality. In Directorate of Film Festivals v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain [2007 (4) SCC 737] this court held : "....Courts do not and cannot act as appellate authorities examining the correctness, suitability and appropriateness of a policy, nor are courts advisors to the executive on matters of policy which the exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, in regard to the procedure for arriving at the cutoff marks. The claim that to deny admission to one student from among more than 2,87,000 students, they manipulated the process of fixing cut-off marks is too far fetched and difficult to accept, apart from the fact that there is no iota of material to support such a claim. It is too much to assume that where nearly three lakhs candidates appeared, a particular procedure was adopted to ensure that a particular candidate failed. It would appear that somewhat similar procedure was adopted in the year 2000 and 2001. The iterative procedure involving mean and standard deviation of the scores, similar to JEE 2006 was followed in JEE 2001. The object of the entire exercise was to ensure a balanced selection among the candidates who participated in the examination. IIT-JEE is a renowned examination trusted by the entire student world. It is not only a difficult examination to pass, but a difficult examination to rank and select the best of candidates having good knowledge in all three subjects. 21. The appellants next contended that the first appellant had obtained 231 marks and he had been found to be unsuitable whereas candidates who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 52 marks in Maths, 53 marks in Physics and 65 marks in Chemistry whose total is 170 marks. The result is that a candidate who is comparatively poor in Maths and Physics, secures a seat by virtue of his good performance in Chemistry, in preference to a candidate who has done uniformly well in all subjects. The traditional procedure may not therefore help in securing candidates who do well in all subjects. If one has to choose the candidates with good performances in all subjects, with the average of the performance of all the candidates who participated in a given examination as the benchmark, it is necessary to apply the more complicated mean and standard deviation methods. Let us take another illustration. Assume that Maths was a very tough subject and many would have failed if 40% was to be the minimum marks to pass in the examination. Candidates who secured 38% or 39% in Maths will fail, though their performance in Maths was reasonable and even if they had secured 70% in both Physics and Chemistry. By adopting mean and standard deviation methods, the Board does not start with a set of uniform minimum passing marks but arrives at different minimum marks for different subjects, d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s as well as aggregate in the main examination. In JEE 2005, the qualifying criteria and the ranks in the screening tests were based on the total marks scored and there were no individual subject cut off marks. In JEE 2006 there were independent cut off marks for each subject and also for the aggregate, and the cut off procedure was not disclosed before the JEE examination. However in JEE 2007 and JEE 2008 subject cut off procedure was made available to the public through the JEE website before the JEE examination. During JEE 2007, the subjects cut off were determined on the basis that top 80% candidates qualified in each subject (that is 1, 4 and 3 in Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry and aggregate cut off was 206). During JEE 2008, the subject cut off was 5, 0 and 3 in Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry and aggregate cut off for common merit list was 172. The subject cut off procedure ensured the number of candidates above each subject cut off were exactly the same. In the year 2009 the subject cut off for General category was 11, 8 and 11 for Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry (out of 160 each) and the aggregate cut off was 178. The cut off marks (that is the minimum qualifying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
