Delhi HC to pass verdict Wednesday on pleas over errors in CLAT UG-2025 questionnaire
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court is scheduled to pronounce on Wednesday its order on a batch of petitions alleging certain errors in the Common Law Admission Test UG-2025 questionnaire.
According to the cause list uploaded on the court's website, a bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela will pass the verdict on April 23 at 2:30 pm.
The court on April 9 concluded hearing the lawyers for petitioner aspirants, who appeared in the exam in December 2024, and Consortium of National Law Universities and reserved its order.
The court had heard arguments on the questions which are under challenge in the petitions.
It is yet to hear the petitions which have challenged certain questions in CLAT PG- 2025.
The common law admission test determines admissions to undergraduate and postgraduate law courses in national law universities in the country.
Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts alleging several questions in the exam were wrong.
On February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all the petitions over the issue to the Delhi High Court for a "consistent adjudication".
The top court passed the direction on the transfer petitions of CNLUs.
The Delhi High Court had earlier said "suspense and anxiety" were not good for the aspirants and that it intended to complete hearing on the petitions at the earliest for the results to be declared.
There was an urgency in the petitions concerning the undergraduate examinations and the petitions for the post graduate course would be taken up separately, it had added.
Several students wanted the cases to be transferred to the Delhi High Court, saying it passed a favourable order for some petitioners by identifying errors in two questions of the CLAT-UG 2025 exam and directing the consortium to revise their results.
On December 20, 2024, a Delhi High Court's single judge bench directed the consortium to revise the result of CLAT-2025 over the errors in the answer key.
The single judge's verdict, which came on the plea of a CLAT aspirant, ruled the answers to two questions in the entrance test were wrong.
The plea challenged the answer key published by the consortium on December 7, 2024 while seeking a direction to declare correct answers to certain questions.
The single judge bench said the errors were "demonstrably clear" and "shutting a blind eye" would amount to injustice.
While the aspirant challenged the single judge's order which refused his prayer over the other two questions, the consortium also moved the division bench of the Delhi High Court against the single judge's decision.
On December 24, 2024, the division bench refused to pass any interim order after prima facie finding no error with the single judge's order over the two questions and said the consortium was free to declare the results in terms of the judge's decision.
The CLAT, 2025 for admissions in five-year LLB courses in NLUs was held on December 1 and results were declared on December 7, 2024.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
28 minutes ago
- The Hindu
OBC quota deadlock dominates politics in West Bengal; new list an appeasement move, says BJP
The deadlock over the Other Backward Classes (OBC) reservation continues to dominate politics in West Bengal with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leadership accusing the State government of 'appeasement politics' on Wednesday, a day after Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee said that'backwardness'wasthe only benchmark to decide OBC categories. Addressing the State Assembly while tabling the annual report of the West Bengal Commission for Backward Classes for the financial year 2024-25,the Chief Minister had said on Tuesday that a commission set up by the government is holding a survey on 50 new subsections for inclusion in the category. The Calcutta High Court in May 2024 had struck down the OBC reservation awarded to 77 categories, highlighting a complete lack of legislative policy within the 2012 scheme to classify any group as OBC. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court. On March 19, 2025, the State government told the Supreme Court that it would complete the fresh OBC survey within three months. Since the fresh list of OBC reservation is not available, the admission to colleges in the State has not started almost a month after results of Higher Secondary Examinations have been declared. The State government on Tuesday also tabled in the Assembly an interim report on the new OBC list for reservations. 'One-sided benefits' Reacting to the developments, Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari took to social media and said, 'If this reservation list is not prepared with the intention of providing 'one-sided benefits' exclusively to Muslims, by deliberately depriving Hindus and other communities, then the sun rises in the west.' Meanwhile, State Education Minister Bratya Basu has assured that there will be no disruption in the academic calender due to the OBC reservation list.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Quota sub-categorisation ensures marginalised get their share: CJI B R Gavai
NEW DELHI: Nearly a year after penning the seven-judge Supreme Court bench's majority view favouring sub-categorisation of Scheduled Caste quota, India's second Dalit CJI B R Gavai has said the ruling ensured that the most backward among Dalits got a fair share in public employment and admissions to govt educational institutions. Speaking at the Oxford Union on 'From Representation to Realisation: Embodying the Constitution's Promise' on Tuesday night, CJI Gavai stepped into the rare zone of a judge explaining his judgment in public. The seven-judge bench judgment, authored by Justice Gavai, had on Aug 1 last year permitted states to sub-categorise castes within SC communities based on socio-economic backwardness and the degree of under-representation in govt jobs to ensure that the larger pie of 15% quota went to the most backward. The court had asked govts to devise suitable criteria to bar the 'creamy layer' among the SCs from availing reservation. The logic behind the court's suggestion for keeping out the 'creamy layer' was that the children of civil servants and others from among the SCs, who had moved up on the socio-economic ladder and received good education, were not deserving of quotas. In his speech, CJI Gavai said the apex court's decision to uphold the principle of sub-classification within quotas for SCs "was not to question the relevance or success of reservations, but to ensure that the most marginalised within marginalised groups receive their fair share". He said many decades ago, millions of citizens of India were called untouchables, but the country had marched ahead and "here we are today, where a person belonging to those very (untouchable) people is speaking openly, as the holder of the highest office in the judiciary of the country". "This is what the Constitution of India did. It told the people of India that they belong, that they can speak for themselves, and that they have an equal place in every sphere of society and power," he said, adding that it was possible because the prime architect of the Constitution, Dr B R Ambedkar, made inclusivity and equality the bedrock of constitutional values and guarantees.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Forced narco tests illegal, results not admissible: Supreme Court
Setting aside a high court order allowing narco-analysis tests on accused persons without consent, the Supreme Court on Wednesday asserted that involuntary or forced tests are not permissible under the law. The Supreme Court held that compelling an accused to undergo narco-analysis, without free and informed consent, violates the constitutional protection against self-incrimination under Article 20(3) and the right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the report of such an involuntary test or any information discovered as a result is not admissible as evidence in criminal or other proceedings," the bench clarified. The order came days after a Patna High Court order accepting a police officer's submission to subject all accused persons and witnesses in a criminal case to narco-analysis testing. The submission of the Sub-Divisional Police Officer was accepted during the hearing of a bail plea filed by the its ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its landmark 2010 judgment in Selvi and Others v State of Karnataka, which held that forcibly subjecting individuals to narco-analysis, polygraph, or brain mapping tests was unconstitutional. The court reiterated that these techniques, if not voluntarily undertaken, breach personal liberty and the right against safeguards laid down in the Selvi case judgement:No lie detector or narco-analysis test shall be conducted without the accused's voluntary accused must be informed of the legal, emotional, and physical implications of the to legal counsel must be provided before deciding on consentConsent must be recorded before a Judicial guidelines for polygraph tests should be followed, and similar protocols adopted for narco-analysis and brain mapping top court further clarified that an accused may voluntarily choose to do so at an appropriate stage, such as during the presentation of defence evidence in a even in such cases, the court emphasised that there is no indefeasible right to undergo narco-analysis. It also said that judicial authorisation must account for the totality of circumstances, including safeguards and genuine InMust Watch
