New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday restrained the Indian Institute of Technology (IITs) across the country till further orders from conducting counselling or admitting students subsequent to the Joint Entrance Examination this year.
A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and A M Khanwilkar also restrained the High Courts from entertaining any writ petition relating to counselling and admissions to the IITs from Friday onwards.
The Supreme Court also sought details of the petitions pending before the High Courts and the number of petitions challenging the IIT-Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) 2017 rank list, and awarding of additional marks to all candidates who had appeared in the test, according to PTI.
The bench listed the matter for further hearing on July 10.
On June 30, the apex court had issued notice to the Ministry of Human Resource Development on a plea seeking quashing of the IIT-JEE 2017 rank list.
The petition, filed by IIT aspirant Aishwarya Agarwal, had sought the court's direction to declare that the action of awarding "bonus marks" to the candidates who had appeared in the JEE (Advanced) 2017 examination was wrong and violated her right, as well as that of other students.
It also sought a direction for preparation of the all- India rank list after rectifying the scores of JEE (Advanced) and also award marks for the incorrect questions to the candidates who had attempted the right answers.
The IIT Madras while announcing the JEE Advanced results on June 11 had said those students who took the IIT JEE Advanced 2017 exam may get 11 bonus marks for three ambiguous questions. This would be applicable to all candidates who took the examination on May 21.
It said the decision to award 11 bonus marks for the three ambiguous questions was taken following an internal review meet on the question papers by IIT experts.
As an alternative, the petitioner said the institution should conduct fresh examination and prepare a fresh merit list or grant all students another opportunity to appear in the examination to be conducted next year.
The petition also sought an interim stay on the merit list and the counselling, saying it would cause serious prejudice to the petitioner and other deserving candidates.