Praveena V.Kamath vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 25 November, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 33754 of 2009(L)


1. PRAVEENA V.KAMATH, H.NO.216/A,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY

3. LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :25/11/2009

 O R D E R
                       P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
        = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = =
             W.P.(C). Nos. 33754 & 33943 OF 2009

        = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = =

           Dated this the 25th day of November 2009.


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioners in these writ petitions appeared for the

State Eligibility Test (SET) 2008 conducted by the L.B.S.Centre

for Science and Technology. As per the stipulations in clause 13

of the prospectus, to pass the State Eligibility Test, a candidate

should secure atleast 35 percent marks in Paper I and Paper II

separately and atleast 50 per cent as the average of the

percentages in Paper I and Paper II. By Ext.P3 judgment, this

Court held that the stipulation that the candidate should secure

atleast 50 per cent as the average of the percentages in Paper I

and Paper II is not a proper or correct method to determine

whether a candidate has passed the State Eligibility Test. This

Court directed the L.B.S.Centre for Science and Technology to

declare that those candidates who have secured 50 per cent of

the aggregate marks in Papers I and II have passed the

examination instead of that 50 per cent of the average of the

percentage of marks in Papers I and II. The petitioners in these

writ petitions claim the benefit of Ext.P3 judgment.

W.P.(C). Nos. 33754 & 33943 OF 2009

2

2. Sri. P.B.Suresh Kumar, the learned standing counsel

appearing for the third respondent submits that the issues raised

in these writ petitions is covered in favour of the petitioners by

Ext.P3 judgment in W.P.(C).No.33754 of 2009 and that the third

respondent will necessarily determine whether the petitioners

have passed the State Eligibility Test by securing 50% of the

aggregate of the marks for Papers I and II. In the light of the

said submission, I dispose of these writ petitions with a direction

to the third respondent to extend the benefit of Ext.P3 judgment

to the petitioners in these writ petitions also. I also direct the

L.B.S. Centre for Science and Technology to extend the said

benefit to all the other candidates who have appeared for the

State Eligibility Test (SET) 2008 as directed by this Court in

Ext.P3 judgment without driving them to move this Court

seeking similar benefit. The State Government shall ratify the

said action of the third respondent.

(P.N.RAVINDRAN)
JUDGE

kkms/