Bombay HC to pass verdict in plea to relax Class 12 score criterion in JEE on Wednesday

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala and Justice Sandeep V Marne was hearing a filed by child activist Anubha Srivastava Sahai, adding that the marks scored by such students were not a “true reflection of their actual ability”.

“The marks scored by them is not a true reflection of their actual ability, therefore, those students with lower marks than the eligibility criteria (75 per cent) for this year’s examinations can score very high marks in the upcoming JEE Main 2023, and if a fair chance is denied to them that will affect the future (of) lakhs of bright (students),” stated the plea.

Director of the NTA Binod Kumar Sahu filed an affidavit in reply to the plea stating that its decision was “conscious and well considered” and the relaxation of the criterion for previous academic years was “one time measure”.

The affidavit further stated that students who passed Class 12 in 2020-21 and 2021-2022 were assessed on the basis of their performance in previous examinations as board exams were cancelled owing to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The agency had said, “The relaxation was one time measure and was applicable for the Academic Years: 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 only.” It added that the same was mentioned and informed to the candidates through public notices and “an exception was made by relaxing the said requirement”.

It also said that the present eligibility criteria was deliberated and finalised in JEE Apex Board (JAB) meeting on December 12, last year, and thereafter the NTA published an information bulletin in that regard.

Ruling out the possibility of a “third session” of JEE (Main) exam in May, this year, the NTA said that “the same was unsustainable and required to be rejected”.

On Wednesday, Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh and advocate Rui Rodrigues representing the agency said that the earlier relaxation was temporary in nature and the brochure published every year has a condition of 75 per cent marks. “This condition was kept in abeyance and it has been revived. All students were aware of the facts of conditions in brochures,” the counsels said.

“It is like the students have missed the last bus and there is no bus after that,” Sahai argued.

“We understand your predicament that the government should have taken this decision earlier. This is not restricted to one state, this is pan India. This is not just related to boards for Maharashtra, but to the country. Consider the ramifications it will have. Except for one intervention application, no other students have come forward. This is a PIL. Granting you relaxation today, will affect students who have worked hard and earned marks beyond 75%,” the bench orally told the petitioner and intervenor.

Concluding the hearing in the plea, the bench reserved the same and said that it will pass its verdict on Wednesday.