The results, z-scores and ranks are lined up according to the new syllabus and old syllabus. The examination was held on both old and new syllabuses in 2019.
Rangana Lakmal Deshapriya of SSU pointed out that they had been discussing the crisis with the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the educational authorities for more than seven months. He said they urged the UGC to announce the number of students to be enrolled. People's Liberation Front (JVP) MP Anura Kumara Dissanayake raised a question in the parliament about this on 18th February 2020.
However, UGC was telling that they would base on a Supreme Court judgment delivered in 2012. Rangana Lakmal Deshapriya pointed out that the judgment is relevant to the case SCFR/29/2012 which was filed on similar ground.
SSU said that UGC gave z-score under one system and two fundamental right petitions were filed against it. SCFR/29/2012 judgment was delivered accordingly. In that, only the method of z-score calculation was discussed. After that, the education authorities prepared z-scores separately and lined them up together.
However, eight petitions were filed by over 100 students against this decision. The way the lining up and selection were discussed in this case and a settlement was reached to line up the new syllabus and old syllabus separately. UGC proposed four ways of enrollment and it was agreed to give maximum benefit to the student. Accordingly, UGC maximised the university intake to minimise the injustice to the students.
According to the settlement related to SCFR408/12 case, eventually, the enrollment was increased by26%. University admission was increased from 21,500 to 27,100 by enrolling 5,600 more students. The students were given an opportunity to sit for the examination for the fourth time as well. The universities could afford the increased intake. "For example, the intake for medicine was 1175 and it was increased by another158 students. It was an increase of 15%. Ironically, although the UGC that was complaining about the facilities for the students, later enrolled more than 50 students to state medical faculties for paid education," said Rangana Lakmal Deshapriya of SSU.
However, the settlement arrived at the second instance in 2012 has not been considered by UGC in 2020.
SSU said that the judgment of SCFR/29/2012 is not relevant to UGC because it is on the way the z-score is calculated. Instead, UGC must consider the settlement arrived at the case SCFR408/12 and schedule university entrance accordingly.
SSU pointed out that the UGC had not announced the quota of student enrollment for universities in 2020. Therefore, the students had expectations based on the results of the students in previous years. Some lost opportunity and some lost the expected course. Some did not apply for other courses because they had expected they would be selected to particular courses, according to their result. Also, the students lost the hopes to enrol in higher rank universities. Z-score is relevant to the selection of subjects after the entrance too. The students who lost opportunity for university entrance missed the chance to apply for the other higher education courses like NDT and HNDE.
After 14 months, now, their hopes are shattered due to the UGC action. Therefore, SSU demanded the government and the UGC to implement the agreement arrived at the Supreme Court in 2012 in relation to case SCFR/408/12 without further wasting their time.
SSU further challenged the UGC to release the statistics on the enrollment and prove that their method of enrollment is right.
"Grant a solution based on the settlement in 2011 using a method to maximise the enrollment on the basis of district ranks and island ranks," Rangana Lakmal Deshapriya of SSU urged the government.
