Delhi HC on CLAT 2025 outcomes, The Delhi High Court has directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to revisit the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 merit list, initially revealed on December 7, 2024.
The Court’s order follows a writ petition difficult the ultimate reply key for the CLAT 2025 undergraduate examination and searching for a revision of the petitioner’s consequence. The petitioner argued that discrepancies within the reply key affected their rating, probably impacting admission to extra prestigious establishments.
Errors recognized in CLAT 2025 query paper
The courtroom recognized important points with two particular questions in Set A of the CLAT 2025 examination paper:
Question 14: Justice Jyoti Singh upheld the petitioner’s declare, agreeing with the Expert Committee’s evaluation that possibility ‘C’ was the proper reply. The courtroom dominated that marks ought to be awarded to all candidates who chosen this feature.
“Since the Court has upheld option ‘C’ as the correct answer, which was also the view of the Expert Committee, benefit cannot be restricted only to the petitioner and will extend to all candidates who have opted for option ‘C’,” the judgment said, as reported by Bar and Bench.
Question 100: The courtroom directed that this query be excluded from analysis. It accepted the Expert Committee’s recommendation, citing blatant errors that rendered the query invalid.
Implications for different CLAT 2025 candidates
The courtroom’s orders necessitate revisions to the merit list, affecting all candidates who tried these questions. Justice Singh emphasised that ignoring such clear errors would quantity to an injustice.. Consequently, the Consortium of NLUs has been instructed to lengthen the revised marking scheme to all affected candidates, not simply the petitioner.
The petitioner’s plea additionally sought the courtroom’s intervention for different disputed questions, together with numbers 37, 67, 68, 89, 99, and 102. While objections to questions 89, 99, and 102 have been upheld in the course of the preliminary evaluate course of, the petition additionally demanded corrections to the remaining contested questions and a reassessment of the petitioner’s marks and rank.
In addition, the petition raised issues in regards to the analysis course of and the transparency of the CLAT 2025 last reply key. A illustration highlighting these discrepancies was submitted on December 9, 2024, alongside calls for for the formation of a Grievance Redressal Committee to deal with candidate grievances.
Court’s place on judicial intervention
While the Supreme Court has cautioned towards frequent interference in educational issues, the Delhi High Court justified its intervention due to the blatant nature of the errors within the reply key. The judgment highlighted that courts should train restraint however can act when evident errors compromise the equity of outcomes.
Consortium’s response and subsequent steps
The Consortium of NLUs acknowledged the courtroom’s directives and introduced a delay within the launch of the primary admission list, which was initially scheduled for December 26, 2024. According to varied media studies and social media responses from candidates, the Consortium is consulting authorized consultants to decide probably the most acceptable course of motion. In its communication to candidates, the Consortium reportedly said, “We acknowledge that this development may create some uncertainty, and we assure you that the Consortium is committed to ensuring transparency and fairness in the process.”
