SC won’t stay Kerala HC order to publish revised KEAM rank list

The Supreme Court on Wednesday did not immediately stay a July 10 Kerala High Court order directing the State to publish the revised rank list of the Kerala Engineering Architecture and Medical Examination (KEAM) 2025.

Adopting a cautionary note, the top court said it did not want to create a sense of uncertainty among students.

A Bench headed by Justice P.S. Narasimha, instead, issued notice to the State and the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations on a petition challenging the High Court decision.

The High Court had directed Kerala to revert to the standardisation formula followed in the original prospectus of KEAM 2025.

The apex court listed the next hearing after four weeks. The court did not budge even though petitioners requested an earlier date of hearing for the reason that admission procedures would be over by August 14 as per the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) deadline.

Kerala won’t file appeal

Meanwhile, the State of Kerala informed it was not filing an appeal against the High Court order. The top court had, on July 15, asked Kerala to revert on whether it planned to file an appeal.

Appearing for Kerala, senior advocate Jaideep Gupta said the State proposed to implement the necessary reforms in KEAM’s standardisation formula the next year in order to level any bumps in the playing field between CBSE and State syllabus candidates.

“We propose to make the change next year,” Mr. Gupta said.

Appearing for a group of CBSE students who had filed a caveat in the case, senior advocate Raju Ramachandran and advocate Aljo Joseph said the State must also reflect on why State syllabus students were lagging behind their CBSE counterparts year after year.

“Perhaps they need to have a relook of the curriculum. There has to be an introspection by Kerala and other States,” Mr. Ramachandran said.

Advocates Prashant Bhushan and Zulfiker Ali P.S., representing the State syllabus students who appealed against the High Court order, countered that the State’s decision to amend the standardisation formula was a result of such an “introspection”. The amended formula had been devised to end the disparity between CBSE and State syllabus candidates for KEAM.

Unfair advantage

The State had constituted the Standardisation Review Committee in April after exam authorities had flagged that the 1:1:1 ratio for marks obtained in 10+2 for Maths, Physics and Chemistry gave CBSE students an unfair advantage over the State Board students.

“This had meant the State students would see their marks drop while the CBSE students would have their marks soar,” Mr. Bhushan said.

On July 1, the State, taking into consideration the committee report and the suggestions given by the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations, had decided to amend the ratio for subject marks in KEAM 2025 to 5:3:2 instead of the earlier 1:1:1. It had gone on to publish the KEAM rank list the very same day.

On July 10, the High Court had directed the reversion to 1:1:1 as provided in the original prospectus.

“The State government was entirely within its right to make the amendment. It was done on the basis of a report by an expert committee. The High Court had intervened despite a consistent stand by this court to not intervene in policy matters unless they were found to be arbitrary or discriminatory to students,” Mr. Bhushan argued.

Mr. Gupta said the State was entirely with Mr. Bhushan on merits, and assured reforms for next academic year.