Search This Blog

Saturday, July 8, 2017

The mess called JEE Advanced

Supreme Court, yesterday, stayed the process of admission to IITs, NITs, and several other institutes. A student has filed a petition a couple of weeks ago, in which she has claimed that awarding marks to all students for wrong questions was fundamentally flawed and has resulted in significant change of merit, and that there were alternative ways in which the problem of wrong questions could have been sorted out. The writ petition can be read on the same page as this news report.

I read the petition. I don't know if everything being claimed there is correct or not. It is for IITs to decide on how to respond to those points. However, if even ONE of those claims is correct, I think it is a matter of shame for the IIT system. The news paper reports suggest that IITs responded yesterday to the petition by arguing that the process of admission has already started, that about 30,000 students have already accepted admission, and that it will take a long time to recheck everything, etc. I hope this is incomplete response and that they have said more things. I hope IITs are able to argue that the suggestions made by these students are somehow wrong or unimplementable. Because if they have not argued on those lines and cannot argue on those lines, then we can have no trust in JEE any more. And I believe that a fair JEE was always one of the most important reason behind brand IIT. If JEE is no more fair, then it won't take long for brand IIT to go down as well.

But I have my doubts. People who have followed this blog would know that my confidence in fairness of JEE and in the competence of IIT system to conduct a large public exam has always been very low. Every year, we see wrong questions. Every year, we see that IITs don't respond to alternate answers by external experts (or even internal experts).

Let us look at the main issue. Apparently there are questions which got misprinted in Hindi medium. The claim in the petition is that because the question was misprinted, IITs decided to award marks to every single student. Now, what is the percent of students who sought Hindi question paper. I believe that the number is 3-4%. Only a couple of variants out of 10 variants of the question paper had a misprint. Which means that about 0.5% of the students received a different question. Now the petitioner is claiming that it was possible to identify these 0.5% students who may have given a different answer, and for these 0.5% students, one could do different grading. There is no reason to give full marks to all students. Makes eminent sense. If you incorrectly identify (why would you) 5-10 students, say, and 1-2 of them could have been in the top 10,000 ranks, then you are unfair to 1-2 students out of 1.6 lakhs. But by giving marks to all 1.6 lakhs, you have been unfair to may be 10,000 students who could solve that question. Now, if you are faced with a difficult situation, and the only two options are that you be unfair to 10 students or you be unfair to 10,000 students, what would you choose. I am sure the answer is obvious. You would rather be unfair to 10 students than 10,000 students. But IITs don't think like that. (And I have been inside the room with JEE Implementation Committee in the past, so I know the culture there.) The IITs would argue that let us give bonus marks to everyone. It does not matter how many students you are unfair to, since no one would do such back of the envelope calculations. If you give marks to everyone, there is a greater chance of happiness all over, and less chance of someone going to court. And the only thing that matters is a court case, and not fairness in the system.

At another place, the petitioner has pointed out that while the IITs have given out one single answer to a question, a large number of coaching places have given alternate solutions which result in different answers out of the four choices. Now, let us remember that some of these coaching classes have some of the finest Physics/Chemistry/Maths faculty, some times better than the paper setters. If these people are saying that there is an alternate solution, and showing that alternate solution on their websites, IITs must respond to them. They must point out why those solutions are not acceptable. I know what IITs will argue. How can they respond to each and every answer given by any tom, dick and harry. But sorry, they are not tom, dick or harry. There are typically, only a handful of answers which are different from IIT answers, and there is no reason why IITs can not respond to those handful of answers, and that too, as I said above, by some of the finest brains of the country. Again, I have had experience of being in the room. Typically, it happens because the question is ill framed. The language is ambiguous. And no paper setter would ever admit that the language is ambiguous. And if they were to respond they will have to admit in writing that a particular statement only means something and that in their opinion alternate meanings are wrong. Now, this interpretation can be easily challenged in a court of law. So, as I said above, the fairness does not matter. Only court cases matter. So we won't agree to those alternative solutions, since our ego is hurt, and we won't explicitly respond saying that, since fairness does not matter. Only court cases do. Now, in this particular case, either IITs must respond as to why multiple answers are incorrect or agree to regrade as per multiple answers.

I also want to know if there is any accountability of paper setters. Does their substantial remuneration depend on their performance. Are they told that they will get x amount of money, if there is no dispute about their answers, but will progressively get lesser and lesser money, if it turns out that they made a mess. Is there a process of black listing professors who set erroneous questions. Why does it take weeks to publish the answer key, when the coaching classes normally publish them within an hour. Wasn't a key prepared several months in advance. Why is that key not announced within an hour of the exam.

IITs have argued (as per media reports) that it is too late, that about 30,000 students have taken admission, that regrading will take too much time. First of all, regrading will take a few minutes. Yes, a few minutes. If IITs are claiming that it will take a long time, then they are lying, and someone should be persecuted for lying to the court in an affidavit. All the answers have been scanned and stored. Now, only a key needs to be decided and that needs to be applied to the stored answers. We don't need to scan the answer sheets again. And applying the new key will take a few minutes.

If the scale of the problem is really as serious as this petitioner is claiming than it does not matter if 30,000 students have taken admission. We must restart the process, and if that means that the semester will be delayed by a week or two, so be it. Let us not forget that in 1997 when the JEE question paper was leaked, the semester started 5 weeks late and the heavens did not fall.

My only concern is that the petition seeks as the last resort (page 20, prayer 'e' of the petition) a direction to the IITs that all those who took JEE Advanced this year be allowed to take JEE Advanced next year. I suspect that IITs will latch on to this demand and agree to it, if they are allowed to continue with the admission with the current merit list. This particular petitioner may be ok with such a decision, but it would be grossly unfair to thousands of hard working students (again assuming that what is written in petition is correct).

It is becoming increasingly clear that conducting large public exams is not a core competence of IIT system. I am sure some of you would disagree and point out that in an earlier era JEE was conducted wonderfully well. Well, what was done in the pre-RTI era can not be termed as wonderful. It is just that we don't know what happened then. A few years ago, when the previous government wanted "One Nation, One Test" and we successfully resisted that, one of the commitments that IITs had made was that besides the JEE Implementation Committee (consisting of all JEE chairpersons and vice chairs), there will also be a new standing committee which will look at the longer term horizon and advice on how JEE could be made better. That committee does not exist today and all the issues of JEE are left to be resolved by the current chairmen and vice chairs who are under pressure to somehow manage this year's JEE with as few court cases as possible. I think it is high time IIT system has a standing committee to look into the longer term.

Added on 8th July:

A few questions have been asked offline, and I thought I should address those questions.

Q1: IITs appear to have claimed (see the ToI news where this is mentioned) that it is not possible to identify the students who solved the specific Hindi paper with that misprint. Is it possible.

Ans: JEE knows exactly who applied for Hindi question paper and who applied for English question paper. JEE also knows which code paper was given to whom. Now, the only issue is that a student could possibly have both Hindi and English version of the question paper and looked at the English paper and answered it accordingly, even though in JEE data base s/he is shown as a student who received the Hindi question paper. There may be 5-10 such students in the country, but theoretically, they could be 100 or 200 students. So technically, IITs are right in saying that they do not know who have looked at only the Hindi paper before answering.

However, this is just an argument to not do anything to solve the problem. Remember the principle at this stage should be that out of all bad options, we should select the least bad option. So what if JEE were to say that we will grade you according to the language you were supposed to be looking at. This would perhaps be unfair to 5-10 students. The current solution is unfair to 10,000 students. There are other options. What if we consider both 5 and 6 as the right answer for those few students and consider only 6 as the right answer for everyone else. Or even, consider 5 or 6 as the right answer for all students. So let us understand that the only options with IITs are not binary (as Attorney General, the highest law officer of the country is claiming in the highest court of the land). They have multiple options with varying impact on fairness.

Q2: Isn't there a Supreme Court judgment in 2005 that bonus marks in case of wrong questions can only be given to those candidates who attempt the question. Why did IITs award marks to all.

Ans: I have not read that judgment. But I doubt if that would be relevant in the current case. Earlier, the exams required long answers to be written. So if someone has written something in the answerbook which has anything to do with the question, it could be taken as a proof that the answer has been attempted. But now with fully objective type question, students try to solve the question in rough sheets and then fill in a bubble. If they couldn't reach any answer, or if they have a doubt about their answer, they will not fill in the bubble. Since those rough sheets are not kept, and sometimes rough work is done on the question paper itself which is allowed to be taken away by the student, there is no identification possible of students who have "attempted" the answer. Filling in the bubble is certainly a proof of attempt, but not filling in a bubble is not a proof of lack of attempt. But note that this petition is really not dependent on 2005 ruling. This petition is arguing that a better solution key would be more fair than giving bonus marks to all.

Q3: What happens to a student who has rejected BITS/IIIT-Delhi/IIIT-Hyderabad, etc., and is now told that his JEE Advanced rank is much poorer. Wouldn't revising the grading scheme be detrimental to his/her interests.

Ans: Yes, it will be unfair to such a student. However, remember the philosophy that I am suggesting. If you have to be unfair to some, prefer a system with least unfairness. And would you rather be unfair to someone who did not deserve an IIT seat or would you rather be unfair to someone who deserved an IIT seat. Also, it is not as bad. If there is a new ranking and new counseling, the student may not get IIT but will get NIT/IIIT etc. So unfairness to an undeserving student is going to be rather small.

Also, even this unfairness can be handled. The court can order a 10% increase in all IITs in all programs as a one time measure to reduce this kind of unfairness. A single batch being 10% larger will not be a disaster for any IIT. And it will give relief to large number of students whose ranks change. Note that if someone's rank changes drastically downward, there may still be cases where they will not be fully compensated, but heck, these guys didn't deserve to be in IITs by a wide margin.

Added on 9th July:

As a comment on the next blog, Mr. Kandasamy Subramani has sent the link to a petition on There the issue of bonus marks for supposed misprinting has explained very nicely. Please read that.


Megha Agarwal said...

Sir supporting your post that dignity of IIT's are maintained on basis of JEE only. Being the entrance exam to technical institute like IIT's where in-depth understanding of Mathematical skill is must .But the recent paper pattern has contradicted that by lowering the level of mathematical questions and raising level of chemistry which in my views is pointless as a batch of students with good command in mathematics and physics were not able to make upto the branches like CSE and maths and computing or even Electrical which require better mathematical knowledge rather than chemistry fundamentals.
It is the responsibility of exam setters to make paper which acts as suitable filter to let only those students score more whose knowledge match the skill set required to perform efficiently in IIT's.

siddharth jain said...

Dear Sir, I agree with most of the points raised by you and specially liked your comments on our fraternity(coaching teachers) ☺️.
But I still believe that out of all the current public examination systems JEE is perhaps the most transparent and better system. There are score of examples where JEE Main/AIEEE or NEET questions were not even ambiguous but cometely wrong but no bonus marks were given and they checked with the solution given by examiner. JEE being fairer admits it's mistakes year after year. Though admitting mistakes doesn't absolves them on their part. Also on other hand you have AIIMS type system where an online paper's screenshot were all over the social media and stil they didn't accept it as a leak. They don't even give out question paper even in this RTI era plus there are too many frauds in their process of counselling. Also exams like BITSAT also don't give out questions so no question can be raised. My point is though there is scope of much improvement in JEE but still it's not as bad as the others. I haven't said anything in the most debated scaling done in UPSC CSE exam.
@Megha I can't think that only because chemistry was comparatively difficult you will have unworthy students in top streams.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Siddharth, just to clarify, saying that the best brains in coaching business are top class does not say anything about an average coaching teacher though I think an average coaching teacher is also better than the average school teacher they compete with.
Second, if changing the difficulty level was with a well thought of process of what kind of students IITs want to admit, it would be very much appreciated. But if the difficulty levels were different as a random exercise, then it is indeed a sad commentary on JEE. That JEE brings in merit is a statement that has no truth value. IITs have never defined what merit is, what kind of students they want, and in the absence of any such definition, there is no verification possible of the claim.
That the primary value of JEE is in "fairness" is again a very sad commentary on the admission process of IITs. After 55 years of JEE one would have thought that IITs would be able to state what kind of students they want to admit, and then have some data to show that the students selected by JEE meet that benchmark. Yes, fairness is important in a corrupt country. But should that be the only criteria. If we have to conduct an exam for lakhs of students, shouldn't there be some research into that exam.

Kshitiz Verma. said...

I think that the petition is pretty solid and the respondents are bound to loose it in the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, in a long run, it will probably be good as you have mentioned many times in your blog that many substantial measures and changes are required.

Unknown said...

Sir the Hon'ble Supreme Court may refer the matter to an experts committee not belonging to IITs to look into the whole issue(suspicious now) and recommend solution (including reconduct of exam.)

nj said...

Professor Sanghi,

adding to your exceptional insights to the matter, it is very disheartening to know that the exam conducting body is not able to identify those students who took the exam in Hindi.

link -

Rajeev Pathak said...

Absolutely agree sir. It is shame on IIT paper setting body that they can not make a error free question paper. Further shame to defend their ego by not admitting the mistake.

Accountability is a must for every task. The persons reponsible for paper creation including professors whose questions are wrong and the team that was reponsible for translation must be held accountable for the mess.
The people or profs who decided to award bonus marks in case of hindi printing issue ..should also be made accountable for unfair decision.
Answers for 2 questions of hindi version with a specific paper code due to this printing mistake is changed. And as you said it us matter of minutes and hours to reevaluate using the software.

Each mark at mid rank level is equal to 100 ranks..Imagine a plight of kid slipping by 1800 ranks at that range. The kid who deserved to be at 2500 is now at 4300.

It is hugely unfair unjust and shameful. Shows incompetency and inefficiency in the process. Sadly people responsible for this are unlikely to be punished.

vijaykumar pasupula said...

In my view IIT don't think like what you said, first year subjects include all maths, physics, and chemistry. So they are trying to take people who fit for IIT. You should be able to answer any question in any subject as per syllabus of jee advance as question paper is same for all students.

Bittu S said...

Sir instead of giving bonus marks iit can not increase the score of candidates proportionatly from the candidate gets i mean if A gets 108/108 in math his score should be 108+12 =120. if B gets 54/108 then 54+6 =60.same ratio. instead giving 12 marks to all

Bhavesh Parikh Bhavesh said...

I can't believe that prestigious institutions like IIT make such mistakes. It has created a complete mess. Thousands of students - after years of hard work - are awaiting SC judgement. Isn't it too early to face our lethargic legal system. Few days back, all were checking whether to opt for Mechanical or Electrical... now all are worried whether will there be reExam. Whatever be the decision of court, some students will surely be penalised... What a mess... what a mess...

Person said...

Hi, I wanted to respond to something.

You stated that some of the coaching teachers are "the best brains in the country", better than the IIT professors. I want to refute that claim. I was a student in a coaching institute who cleared JEE 2017. Many a times, the institute teachers misinterpret a question, or interpret it in their own way. For example, in mathematics, a statement is true only if it is satisfied by all possible cases (there should not exist a counterexample). In the trigonometry question of JEE 2017 paper 2, there are multiple cases of ordered pairs of angles which satisfy the question statement, but not the answer choices. Thus, none of the statements must be true. However, every coaching institute has disregarded this. They have invented their own rules and created their own meanings for the question (which was originally ambiguous) to fit their needs and came up with an answer, the same answer that the petitioner cites. Coaching institutes do this regularly, and are definitely not infallible.

There are also many other coaching institutes that the petitioner did not cite which have given answers in accordance with the key released by the IITs.

takash gon said...

Sir what are your views on giving seat acc. to reservations? Like my friends who got a rank above 15k+ don't deserve a seat in IIT.. But they belong to SC/ST category so they are getting branches like electrical in IIT Kanpur.. Isnt this unfair?

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Bittu, Whether you give everyone 0 marks, or 18 marks or marks proportional to their other marks, the ranking remains exactly the same. (The tie breaking rule has some quirks, and hence if two students have same total, their ranks may interchange in different cases.) So the level of fairness or unfairness does not change with this strategy.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Person, as I said above, the best in coaching are great. Better than paper setters (and not the best faculty in IITs). There are lots of pretty ordinary teachers and you would come across many of them in your respective coaching centers.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@takash, irrelevant to the current debate.

Shivani Nimesh said...

Yes sir, I am totally agree with you. A new rank list should be declared on the basis of marks , nd marks should be given to only those students who have attempted it .otherwise,it would be unfair with so many student's future.if IIT are capable of announcing new rank list then they must do that..

siddharth jain said...

Well with this delay in counselling I fear many parents are going to loose substantial amount of money they have deposited at the backup options(other private colleges). For ex. in LNMIIT people have already deposited ₹1lakh+ and these institutes have given some cutoff dates by which you get x% cut by some y date and so. Now it will be more difficult to forego such seats early now and hence they will either loose money or opportunity to study at better places.

Rajeev Pathak said...

Sir Regarding your Q1 where you said that some students may have read in Hindi but answered in English and vice versa - I have a comment.
This year paper was not bi-lingual. The students who registered for Hindi paper got Hindi paper, and the students who registered for English got English paper.

IITM has data about who got which language (Hindi or English) paper of code (0 to 9).
The code is written on OMR sheet by student. Language is opted at the time of registration.

Prashant Gupta said...

The sql rank function solves new rank list.The institute teaching cs is saying it will take time is wondered

Tonika Singh said...

essentially if IIT decide to implement the petitioner's claims one thing is clear If you attempted the so called erroneous questions your rank cannot really slip down.. on the contrary it will be go up... In my view atleast the non negative marking questions should be attempted by all ( not doing so doesnt make sense) the problem happens in the negative marking question where some might claim that they did not want to take the risk though not attempting is also an expression of having looked at the problem and make a conscious choice about not doing it..

V Narayana Murty Kolapalli said...

Great insight into the issue. Good solutions to the problems faced and solutions are in really short duration of time. ..

Don't JEE responsibles get those ideas or listen to these??

Krithik Garg said...

The question paper was not bilingual. English language question paper had questions only in English language and Hindi language question paper had questions only in Hindi language.

Unknown said...

Sir I would like to say that giving bonus to those who attempted the question is not fair because there were two questions which were non negative and almost every candidate would have attempted that and there was one question which has no answer. So, nobody would have attempted that and others had multiple answers.

Aashish Malik said...

Sir I would like to say that two questions out of those five questions were non, most of candidate s would have attempted those questions and one question did not had any correct option.others had multiple answers. So,giving bonus to those candidates who attempted the question fails here.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Rajeev and @Krithik, while the question paper was not bilingual, they were told that the English version is available, if they want. So theoretically a few of these Hindi people may have asked for an additional English question paper and solved the question given in English. But as I said above, this is not a strong argument, since essentially what IITs are saying is that we can't be unfair to these 10 students and these 10 students are so important to us that we are willing to be unfair to all 1.6 lakh students.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Tonika, the way I am interpreting the petition is as follows. Some questions were wrong only because they had multiple interpretations and hence multiple answers while the paper setter had intended to set the question as one with single answer. IITs have said that the question is wrong, there can not be two answers, and hence we cancel the question (Note that canceling the question and giving 0 to everyone and giving bonus marks to everyone is same thing since the marks are not important, ranking is). The petitioner is saying that while the question may not be what was intended by the paper setter, it was still a valid question. Because of the ambiguity in the interpretation, if there are two answers, then treat both answers as correct. This is less unfair since most students would have either worked with one interpretation or the other. There may have been a few students who would have understood that there are two interpretations, and not knowing which one would IITs accept, decided not to attempt. So a decision to award marks to only those who attempt with either interpretation would be unfair to some. But if we follow the principle of least unfairness in the system, we should agree to be unfair to those few rather than be unfair to a large number of students.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Unknown, questions which had no answer are not the point of contention. The petition is silent on those which means that they also realize that giving bonus marks to all (or giving 0 to all) is the only solution. The issue is about questions which were worded in a way that there are multiple solutions.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Aashish, same answer as above to @Unknown.

subham kundu said...

Sir If we have a new list then it will effect the cut off marks of jee advanced????????

mohit anand said...

Responding to your claims about the coaching teachers,
I have also cleared the JEE 2017 examination. I prepared for it from a coaching & in those two years I felt that coachings don't purposefully interpret a question in their own way.As soon as the paper is released they try to provide a suitable answer to each and every question and that too within hours.They can't come to the conclusion so early that for a particular question everyone should be awarded bonus marks.Another mindset is that they feel IITs would award bonus marks in the worst case,& this is sensible thinking.The paper setters probably would try to avoid such things as far as possible.But this year certainly there were many ambiguities in the paper.So I think the coaching institutes are right on their part,& doing a great job providing such an up-to-the-minute level of education which we certainly can't get in most of the schools.

Vandna Gupta said...

Sir, I completely agree with you .
Also there were questions with ambiguous answer keys on which every coaching institute had taken same stand but IITM took a different stand.
And also, their answer keys were not changed even after IIT asked for any objections and it was merely an eye wash.
For instance in one of the questions,
the value of energy radiated per second was coming out to be 61.33J.
And, an option read :
The energy radiated per second is close to 60 J.
And, we know that up to 5% is a valid approximation.So, it should ideally have been a correct option and every institute also gave it in their answer keys but IITM did not accept it.
Also there were 2-3 more ambiguous questions.
Intellectual like you can make the IITM to consider the comments to the answer key in right perspective.

Bashirul Islam Sheikh said...

Sir, I appeared for JEE Advanced this year. The English and Hindi papers are COMPLETELY SEPARATE- my English paper did not have a single Hindi word in it.

ratan said...

I think there could be an acceptable solution to question no.3. Supernumerary seats can be created to accommodate those who slipped below their current ranks due to perturbation in ranking after retabulation. But whether IITs have enough bandwidth for this solution is debatable. 18 marks is a big window for high ranks in advance JEE.


Dear sir, for the incorrect questions in jee advanced what could be the correct solution? Awarding marks to everyone implies that student who tried those questions and student who left without trying are getting same preference. If marks were given to those who only attempted the question then,in an exam where negative marks play a changing role leaving a question is better than getting a negative sir,will re-exam a solution for this

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Rohith, Read the petition, and/or my next blog.

Tulika Pradhan said...

Dear Sir,
Totally agree with you. There are many questions (other than the ones where bonus marks were given) where there are possibilities of other answers (as also suggested by coaching institutes). Inspite of writing to IIT, there was no response to any one of those. It is important for IIT to respond to all those questions as well answering why alternative answers were rejected.
The impact of all these is so large and often not clearly understood by many. Hope your writing and explaining this will change the way in which SC decides.

J S SONI said...

Following question was also ambiguous, That's why bonus mark is awarded

What is the answer to the chemistry diamagnetic integer question on the JEE Advanced 2017? The answer to this is very debatable. One of the species among the options Be2 qualifies as diamagnetic which can be interpreted by drawing the mot structure for it,however it also has 0 bond order implying it does not exist and hence it's properties shouldn't be commented over. So the probable answers can be 5 or 6 depending on considering Be2 as a diamagnetic species or not.

Bittu S said...

pardon sir . For eg A is getting 108M+70P +100C=278.In case of proportionate in math his total score will be 278+12 bonus=290. Another case B getting 54M+110P+114C=278 which is equal to A. After prop. in math sir his score will be 278+6bonus=284. So strong in math cand.will get his share otherwise iit i think is giving less weighate to math(108marks paper when chem and phy 120 each) . At the same time sir i mention that i am a school teacher you mention him in poor light Waiting for fault you find.Thanks adv.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Bittu, I see your point now. Yes, this would be a great solution for those questions which have no answer.

Bittu S said...

Thanks sir

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Soni, I am not an expert in P/C/M. And hence I can only discuss the principles behind how to handle such a situation, and not comment on specific question.

Kishore Kapoor said...

another safe decision to please the maximum people has been taken
just now.

Rajeev Pathak said...

Quite unfortunate decision. Looks like court did not go into details of questions. On print mistake IITM was 100% at fault.

Shubham Jain said...


I originally intended to leave this as a comment on your blog but it would be rather too much spam. So, I've created a separate blog post for it. While I'm just a student, I've referred quite a few books and sources to come to the following conclusions about the debatable questions.

I also agree with your idea of keeping 10% extra seats and thank you for bringing to attention that the rising number of errors in JEE must be brought under control.

The relevant blog post -

iitmsriram said...

@Dheeraj, those registering for Hindi question paper had the option to ask for English paper as you have noted; and similarly, those registering for English paper also had the option of asking for the Hindi paper at the exam hall. Yes, the numbers who had actually done this is likely to be miniscule, but it would appear that the AG has successfully argued using this line. We may not have accurate records of who all took this spot exchange of question papers and that can cause problems. If we find out, for example, that two people exchanged English papers for Hindi papers at a centre, if we don't have accurate records of the exchange, every candidate at the centre could claim that he / she was one of the two - so all candidates at that centre could ask for the "Hindi bonus" marks.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Sriram, I talked to a JEE Chairman. I am told that only Hindi people had option. But anyway, the idea is that giving everyone marks is unfair to a much larger set of people than grading these 500 students with one answer, or grading everyone else with another answer. In fact, even grading everyone with both answers would be fairer. It is not that AG could successfully argue something or the other, but SC is always concerned about causing serious disruptions, and SC knew that in this case, if they interfere, IITs would actually cause serious disruption (perhaps out of incompetence, and not out of revenge). And IITs have this huge arrogance and they are able to do completely illogical things because they always win court cases.

Kshitiz Verma. said...

I completely agree with your last comment sir. I don't think such strong arguments in favor of the respondents existed. Or probably in other words, may be SC has said that next time such actions will not be spared.

Ajay Kumar said...

@Dheeraj Sanghvi. I support 10% extra seats in IITs. when they can create supernumerary seats for "Same rank same seat Rule" then why they can't create 10% extra seats for this Big mess. They should create extra seats for this Unlucky batch. We deserve this. Please Dheeraj Sir Do something urgently regarding this, We all support you.

Ajay Kumar said...

How they Adjust extra Seats.

Counselling : They just have to Stop current counselling and Continue Again after Incresing Seats. By this way no candidates will loose his seat from currently selected 30k candidate. Those candidates who get seat in 1st 2nd and 3rd round will also get their seat in New Counselling. And even Better choice they get. So No Injustuse to presently selected candidates.

Online Reporting : Those candidates who verfied their documents earlier doesn't need to go to Reporting centre and verify again the same in New Counselling. They are allow to select Freeze, Slide, Float Online. Only New candidates have to come to Reporting centre to verify documents.

Hostel Facility : Many People are saying that currently IITs hostel can not handle 10% more students. Just think a moment about newly opened IITs. Are they have Fully completed Hostals. NO They don't have even a Permanent Campus. Many IITs like IIT Gandhinagar and IIT Jodhpur have 3-4 hostals which are very very far away from each other.

Budget : Again Fund and Budget is not a Big Problem for central Govt. Specially after 1 July (after launch of GST) Govt recieved billions of Trillions Indian Rupee from Public as a Tax. If they do not spend this money on Public (even we are future of Country) and Educations. (I am not asking them to spend all of this. just a grain of rice among all of Storehouse) then where they spend this money.

Please suggest more and more ideas and do something at Ground level. Protesting virtually does not work because no one listen us. I have sent many email to PMO, MHRD and everyone consider them as spam and ignored.

Thank you

Tonika Singh said...

My take on the SC decision see below a question from JEE 2013 Mains which aptly describes the situation
In the below darken ONLY ONE circle which is the correct answer

All the students of a class performed poorly in Mathematics. The teacher decided to give grace marks of 10
to each of the students. Which of the following statistical measures will not change even after the grace
marks were given ?
(1) median
(2) mode
(3) variance
(4) mean
(5) rank

(5) and (3) are correct.😁 however full marks to everyone for not attempting

Bittu S said...

Sir. what a mockery.Even a general catg.candidate scoring zero marks in math have cleared the iit eligibility condition of min.10% marks in each sub.(12 marks bonus out of total 120.).what to say about reserve catg.They become eligible even having -6 marks.
The biggest anomoly this year for jee adv this year is that weightage for
PHY. 117

Kandasamy Subramani said...

Sir, I would like to know the JEE Chairman you talked to. Is that a Prem Bisht from IITM? I know that he is the chairman in IITM, but you have said that you spoke to "a chairman"

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Kandasamy, I wouldn't want to name people I am talking to. But after my last post, the JEE office informed me (and claimed) that even in pure English centers, one bundle of Hindi papers were sent (20 question papers, 2 of each code) just to handle any emergencies, and generally the institute reps are told to help the students in small matters like someone asking for a question paper of different language.

I really doubt this, but the point I made on another forum was that IITs are master at artful lying. It would be extremely difficult to nail them on the truth value of their statements. And knowing IITs for such a long time, if you notice, my blogs are taking a somewhat different angle. My argument is that even if what is being told to the court is true, the numbers are still very small. And the bottom line that court must choose between is that if we have two situations - one which is unfair to a small number of students and another which is unfair to a very large number of students, which option should be exercised. So, even if 2 students in every center took that paper of the other language, we are still talking of very small numbers. And if at all we need to protect their interests, we could allow both answers for them, or even for all.

So my take will be that while I don't trust anything that IITs say in the court, I would argue that even if everything they say is true, still their actions are not correct.

iitmsriram said...

@Dheeraj states "I really doubt this".

I think that is not fair. Perhaps, you have not been personally involved in JEE centre operations for the last few years? Perhaps, spare Hindi question papers is a non-issue in IITK JEE centres where there are candidates opting for Hindi anyway, so carrying spare Hindi question papers is just like carrying extra English question papers and is no big deal and not even noticed? Most centres under IITM do not have even a single registered Hindi candidate, yet I have carried spare Hindi question papers to the exam centres year after year, exactly as described by the JEE office to you. Why doubt this? As I have pointed out in my previous comment and as you agree, even the worst case numbers are very small, but the provision is / was there. I believe it is not fair to throw a cloud of suspicion on it.

But yes, we need to do a better job on our admissions and JEE.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Sriram, I am not doubting that a bundle of 20 Hindi papers is being sent. (In fact, I think it is a bundle of 10 that is sent extra, but that hardly matters.) But what I am doubting is that the center reps are told to give those Hindi papers to any English student that asks for them. Recall, the first statement from JEE office was that Hindi students can ask for English papers, but English students can not ask for Hindi papers. Later, after I published that, they have retracted and said that English students could have also asked for Hindi papers. The written instructions to students as well as center reps were that neither is permissible. The extra papers were really to handle emergency cases where a student shows up who is not listed in that center, or someone claims that he had filled a different language and therefore demands that he be given the paper of his choice.

So I am not doubting that IIT reps carried Hindi papers. I am doubting that the instructions to them were to give away those Hindi papers to anyone who asks for them.

Rajeev Pathak said...

@Sriram sir
It us very clearly written in information brochure that those opting in application form while registering for Hindi will get Hindi paper and those registering for English will get English paper. Therefore ang big decision like bonus marks has to be based on this documented policy in information brochure.
How can you decide bonus marks based on informal activity of carrying few papers of other languages extra and that some students might have been given that.

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Sriram, I don't know how many IIT reps go beyond the written instructions and do things that are explicitly forbidden in written instructions. While examples don't mean anything in a discussion like this, I will still give an example from a few years ago. A student realized that she had been filling the wrong bubbles after she had done a lot of questions. So answer for Q1 was filled in row 2, and so on. After a couple of hours, she requested a replacement OMR sheet, which was denied on account of written instructions that there be no change of OMR sheet under any circumstances. This girl contacted me after the exam and asked if it was possible for the JEE to grade her OMR by shifting all the answers. I found out who the center rep was and asked him if such a request had indeed been made. And he remembered that and admitted that he had denied such a request. If you evaluated her OMR by shifting the answers, she would be close to rank 100, while otherwise she got a rank of about 10,000. But written rules are supreme for many center reps and they don't use common sense to help candidates. So I really wonder if there were cases where an English student demanded Hindi paper, and if they demanded, the center rep agreed, and that paper code was 0.

Bittu S said...

Sir thanks for approving my 4 comments in last 7 days

Dheeraj Sanghi said...

@Bittu, I am afraid your comment will not be published. I usually publish everything that one wants to post, but which is related to the blog article. So far, this is the first comment which I am not publishing.

Ajay Kumar said...

IIT Madras said that they entertain language change option till the last moment of exam. And Our Hon'ble court accepted this argument.
The 7 Zonal IITs send their Professor and Representative to each and every centre in India. And they (Representative) are the Head Invigilator of Exam centre. It is their sole Responsibility of fair conduction of Exam. They are required to follow the guidelines.
See this page from Guidelines given to IIT Representative.

When there is no language change option available for students. (According to Information Brochure)
And also, No language change option were allowed by Invigilator. (According to Guidelines)
Then How IIT Madras could change language of Many students? (Only God knows How.)

Must See this blog :