The Court maintained a single-judge's ruling that the final-minute modifications to the ranking process were capricious and unjust to students in the CBSE and ICSE.
A single judge bench's order to revoke the Kerala Engineering Architecture and Medical Entrance Exam (KEAM) 2025 rank list was affirmed by a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court on Thursday [State of Kerala v. Hana Fatima Ahinus].
Last-minute revisions to the entrance exam prospectus regarding how the ranks were to be determined were deemed arbitrary and unjust to both CBSE and ICSE students by the lone judge.
A Division Bench consisting of Justices Anil K. Narendran and Muralee Krishna S. said today that it could not see any justification for changing the ruling of the lone judge.
"The learned single judge intervened with the government decree and decided the writ petitions after taking into account the opposing arguments. We find no justification whatsoever for interfering with the Single Judge's reasoning in the aforementioned ruling. According to the Court's order, these writ appeals are ultimately rejected since they are unsuccessful.
Students and school bodies that participated in KEAM 2025 submitted a number of writ petitions against a government order (GO) issued on July 1, 2025, and the single judge's ruling was issued in response.
This GO, which was released one hour prior to the rank list, changed the ratio from 1:1:1 to 5:3:2 in the subject-wise evaluation of Plus Two marks in Chemistry, Physics, and Mathematics to establish KEAM ranks.
The government's last-minute modification of the prospectus, which altered the standardization process used to calculate ranks, was ruled unlawful, capricious, and unjust to pupils who followed the CBSE or ICSE syllabus by the lone judge.
The State of Kerala and the Commissioner for Examination filed an appeal with the Division Bench after the ruling.
The State argued that the formula was changed in response to complaints from students who were following the State syllabus, claiming that the previous standardization approach was giving CBSE pupils an unfair edge.
The government claims that this prospectus modification was made in response to feedback from the Commissioner of Entrance Examinations and a standardization review committee.
The State asked the Court to permit the adoption of the updated formula for creating the rank list and to halt the single judge's ruling. Since the admissions process must be finished by the deadline set by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) on August 14, 2025, the State also requested a speedy verdict in the case. The State said that any postponement brought on the reranking would endanger the admissions schedule.
Nevertheless, the Division Bench rejected the State's appeal, concluding that its arguments lacked validity.
"A reading of the report of the standardisation review committee, which was relied on by the Advocate General, would not in any manner support the decision now taken by the Government for adopting an entirely different standardisation procedure," the order stated.
The State was represented by Advocate General K Goplakrishna Kurup.
Kurian George Kannanthanam, a senior attorney, represented the students.
This website is all about sharing knowledge and updating everything about Law.
