Report Wire - KCET Row: KEA submits new report back to Karnataka HC, proposes 6% reduce in PCM marks for CET repeaters

Report Wire

News at Another Perspective

KCET Row: KEA submits new report back to Karnataka HC, proposes 6% reduce in PCM marks for CET repeaters

2 min read
KCET, KEA, Karnataka High Court

KCET row: The Karnataka Examination Authority (KEA) has submitted a proposal to the two-judge bench listening to the KCET rating case whereby they proposed a complete of 6% marks be deducted from the Physics, Mathematics and Chemistry (PCM) from the qualifying examination (QE) marks of the repeaters. The KEA said that 6 marks from physics, 5 marks from chemistry and seven marks from arithmetic be deducted from the qualifying examination or pre-university marks (PU) of the KCET repeaters.

The KEA additionally argued that the repeaters in 2021 had been evaluated based mostly on inner evaluation due to the cancellation of the PUC exams as a result of pandemic, which really fetched them extra marks.

According to an advocate, representing the petitioners, a sure batch of repeaters agreed on the proposal whereas the remainder turned it down and insisted on an analysis based mostly on full advantage.

The two-judge bench consisting of appearing Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty has now adjourned the KCET listening to to September 23 at 10:30 am.

After a single decide bench, Justice Krishna Kumar, on September 3 allowed the petition of the KCET repeaters and ordered a revaluation of KCET rankings by contemplating 50% of qualifying examination (QE) marks and 50% of CET marks, the state authorities filed an enchantment within the Karnataka High Court earlier than a two-judge bench. The state authorities said that, contemplating 50% of QE marks for repeaters shall be unfair for over 1.75 lakh freshers.

The KEA evaluated the CET rankings for repeaters from final 12 months who took a drop and appeared once more in 2022 solely based mostly on 100% CET outcomes, much like the analysis in 2021. However, calling it unfair, the repeaters filed a petition in HC after which the choice turned in favour of them.