The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday [August 18] directed the State Government to file an affidavit outlining steps taken to consider the formulation of a policy for the standardisation of marks obtained by students from different educational boards for admissions through the Karnataka Examinations Authority (KEA).

A Division Bench of Justice Jayant Banerji and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju was hearing a writ petition filed by a minor, challenging the KEA's merit determination process in UG-CET Exams.

It has been contended in the petition that the current system, which aggregates raw marks from the State Board, CBSE, and other boards in a 50:50 ratio with Common Entrance Test (CET) scores, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

The petitioner, who was a CBSE student, alleges that marks from different boards are not comparable, and that the KEA does not apply any normalization or equivalence correction.

The court had earlier appointed Senior Advocate Vikram A. Huilgol as Amicus Curiae since the party in person was a minor.

On Tuesday, Advocate General R. Shiv Charan appeared for the State and sought an adjournment to enable the government to file an affidavit detailing the steps taken pursuant to the court's previous directives. The court was informed that an internal e-note from the Under Secretary, Higher Education Department, had been issued suggesting potential modifications to the 2006 Rules [Karnataka Selection of Candidates for Admission to Government Seats in Professional Educational Institutions Rules, 2006].

The Court granted the adjournment and directed the State to file a comprehensive affidavit before the next date, after serving an advance copy to the Amicus Curiae.

The matter will be heard next on September 2, 2026.

Earlier, the KEA had issued a notification implementing a “Best of Two” marks policy titled “CET 2026 - Determination of Merit”, for Karnataka 2nd PUC students for deciding the inter-se merit for admission to Government Seats in professional educational Institutions for the Academic Year 2026-27, with the examinations being held in April 2026.

On July 29, 2026, the Court had directed the respondents to file counter-affidavits, posing a specific question to the State Government regarding the possibility of formulating a standardisation policy.

“…When queried, [the counsel for the State and KEA] have candidly admitted that after the Rules were framed in the year 2006, no further statutory provision or guidelines or notification was issued by the State Government regarding standardization of marks," the court had then noted in the order.

The Amicus had also conceded that there is no policy for standardization of marks obtained by the candidates appearing in respective Board Examinations. However, the Amicus also referred to the Kerala High Court judgment in Jomon Jaison v. State of Kerala(2026), which upheld a standardization policy by reasoning that judicial review in academic matters should be resorted to only in exceptional circumstances.

The Bench, after hearing the amicus, had then prima facie observed that while the petitioner's participation in the process and the 'Rules of the Game' may bar him from seeking relief for the current academic year, the issue raised is of 'larger public importance'.

“…We would seek the opinion of the Government regarding the larger issue being sought to be raised as to there not being a policy for standardization of marks across various Boards and that deserving candidates in various Boards are left out due to non-availability of any process for standardization of marks”, the Court had stated earlier in its order citing instances of other governments who have formulated standardisation policies for marks across various Boards.

Title: Master Gururaj T. J. (Minor) vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors.

Case: WP NO.18808/2026