‘Under huge stress': Open school students move Delhi HC as JEE-Mains counselling begins before their Class 12 results are out
Om Upadhyay performed better than 97.7 per cent of his competitors in the JEE-Mains exam but he was far from being elated about it. The reason? His Mains result came before his Class 12 open school results, which will only be released by the National Institute of Open Learning (NIOS) by the end of June.
Despite scoring 97.7 percentile, he will not be allowed to participate in the counselling process, which is a prerequisite for getting admission in Delhi Technological University (DTU), Netaji Subhash University of Technology (NSUT), and Indraprastha Institute of Information Technology Delhi (IIIT-Delhi).
'I'm under tremendous stress. My luck didn't support me, it seems,' Om told The Indian Express. 'With these marks, I could have gotten into DTU… It was my dream,' he said.
Aggrieved, Om, who belongs to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS), approached the Delhi High Court on May 28 seeking relief along with two other NIOS students who scored 91.66 percentile and 72.54 percentile (SC student). Their main grievance? That they are not even being allowed to appear provisionally before the Counselling Committee and are being discriminated against due to no fault of their own.
While the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and Indian Certificate of Secondary Education (ICSE) have declared the results of the Class 12 examination, open school students have been left in the lurch, anxiously waiting for their results with every passing minute. The open school examinations concluded on May 19, while the JEE Mains result was out a month earlier, on April 18.
The petitioners moved the Delhi High Court against the Joint Admission Committee, which is a consortium of institutions for admission to undergraduate programmes in Delhi government-funded premier universities offering engineering and architecture programmes. The admissions are done on the basis of the rank of students in the JEE Mains exam. The four participating institutions are offering 6,491 seats in engineering this year.
'In the past, JAC released their schedule for Counselling in a manner so that the last date of applying in the Counselling is post the declaration of Class XII result by NIOS. This was done in order to accommodate the students of Class XII, who appeared through open school, so that they can actively participate in the JAC Counselling and compete with the students from the other boards,' read the plea moved by the three students who were represented in court by advocates Ankit Singh Sinsinwar, Ravi Kumar and Dhananjay.
'However, to the shock and surprise of Petitioners, commencement of Online registration and choice filling was to be done from 21.05.2025 (May 21) and last date and time for Online registration and choice filling was 02.06.2025 (June 6), till 10.30 pm,' stated the plea, while seeking relief.
'If the Petitioners are denied the opportunity to even participate in the Counselling process, their whole year shall get wasted and it cannot be even explained the mental trauma and anxiety they would undergo for not even being allowed to sit in the Counselling process, without any fault of theirs,' it added.
The counselling for JAC universities will go on for five rounds. After the five rounds are concluded, a registration portal and choice filling/editing portal will be opened on June 19 by the JAC as a one-time measure. However, the petitioners will not be able to seek this relief as well as their results are likely to be out after June 20.
The Class 12 marksheet is relevant only to the extent that it assesses the minimum qualifying marks which are 60 per cent or more for the BTech courses offered by NSUT and DTU and 70 per cent for the same courses at IIIT-Delhi.
In the plea, the petitioners have also cited the example of the Joint Seat Allocation Authority (JoSAA) which has been set up by the Ministry of Education to manage and regulate the joint seat allocation for admissions to 127 institutes across the country, including 23 IITs and 31 NITs. The JoSAA allows candidates to participate in the counselling process in case the Class 12 results are awaited, subject to them providing the relevant documents at the time of admission.
Close to 1.5 lakh students appeared for NIOS exams across India. The Delhi High Court, meanwhile, reserved its order on May 30.
'This is the first time the JAC has done this… It was totally unexpected. I am hoping we can get relief from the high court,' Om said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
an hour ago
- New Indian Express
Award marks on two disputed PG admission question, Delhi HC directs CLAT consortium
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Friday directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to award marks to candidates for two disputed questions in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 for postgraduate (PG) students. A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ruled in favour of the candidates on two out of the three questions that had been challenged before the court. One of the questions under dispute concerned a supposed extract from the Supreme Court's judgment in Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v A Rajappa and Ors. The court noted that this was not an actual extract from the judgment, but rather material taken from a commentary. 'It is not disputed that the candidates who had appeared in the examination were not previously provided with any list of judgments that they were to be ready with. That apart, it is not disputed that the passage (V) is not an extract from the judgment... it would be unreasonable to expect candidates to look for any answer beyond what is provided in the passage itself. Thus, the answer in option 'B' is incorrect and option 'C' is the correct answer. Resultantly, the Consortium shall accord marks to the candidates accordingly,' the court held. The bench also rejected the Consortium's position on a jurisprudence question regarding the source of the statement: 'Right is an interest which is to be recognised, protected and enforced by law.' The petitioners had also urged the Court to examine the Rs 1,000 fee imposed per objection to the CLAT PG provisional answer key, arguing it was excessive. While acknowledging that the fee appeared high compared to similar national-level exams, the court recognised the Consortium's argument that the charge was intended to deter frivolous objections. 'There has to be a fine balance which needs to be resolved between two sets of genuine grievances,' the court observed.
Hindustan Times
5 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Haryana minister Mahipal Dhanda credits Super-100 scheme for JEE Advanced results
Haryana education minister Mahipal Dhanda has praised the impressive performance of government school students in the JEE Advanced 2025, highlighting that these institutions have become powerful platforms for success. In a statement, Dhanda said that 193 students from government schools across the state under the Super-100 programme appeared for the JEE exam, with 72 successfully qualifying for JEE Advanced. The minister credited the success to Haryana's Super-100 programme, designed to prepare underprivileged students for national-level competitive exams like IIT and JEE. The initiative, Dhanda said, has provided a new ray of hope for poor students aspiring to excel in the competitive field of education. The minister said that the most notable achievement was the success of 24 girls in the also mentioned Ravinder, a student from Unchana block in Jind district, who secured AIR 212 in the OBC category and overall AIR 1,267. He completed his Class 10 from Government Senior Secondary School, Gurana, Hisar. Dhanda further pointed out that students from several districts performed well, including eight from Faridabad, seven each from Gurugram and Hisar, and six each from Bhiwani and Jind.
Hans India
5 hours ago
- Hans India
HC grants relief to candidates
New Delhi : The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to CLAT-PG candidates over alleged discrepancies in the answer key and directed the consortium of NLUs to declare results soon. A bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela's decision came over the plea of students in relation to a couple of answers in the key. The court, however, rejected the objection with respect to the declared answer to a third question, and asked the consortium of national law universities (NLUs) to accordingly award marks to the candidates. The court passed the order while deciding three pleas seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT)-PG 2025. The bench's verdict highlighted the issue of a high fee of Rs 1,000 charged by the consortium per question for raising the objection to the provisional answer key, observing there ought to be a 'fine balance' between the concerns of the candidates and the institutions. While comparing the fee charged for objected questions by other organisations, the fees sought by the consortium 'appeared to be excessive and disproportionate' but the consortium's concern that it was required to keep frivolous individuals and coaching institutes at bay also did not appear to be 'fanciful or imaginative', it added. The bench, however, expected the consortium to take heed of its observations and take appropriate steps to 'avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations'. 'It may be advisable for the consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (retd) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it,' the bench said. The court ruled on the correctness of the answers in the answer key after considering each question and the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioners and the consortium. CLAT determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country. CLAT PG 2025 was held on December 1, 2024. Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong. On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication'. The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of the consortium.
