Supreme Court Petition Questions 'Procedural Irregularities' in CLAT 2025
Click to start listening
New Delhi, Dec 5 (NationPress) A petition has been submitted to the Supreme Court contesting the 'procedural irregularities' and 'discriminatory treatment of candidates' during the administration of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025, the entrance examination for admission to 5-year integrated LL.B. and LL.M. programs at National Law Universities (NLUs).
The petition highlighted that sealed envelopes were distributed to candidates at 1.50 p.m. at one examination center, while at another center, these envelopes were only handed out after 2 p.m.
According to the petition, 'Since any candidate would require a few minutes to write down his/her Admit Card Number as well as Question Booklet Number and fill the corresponding circles, candidates were not treated equally at all centers due to procedural discrepancies in following the instructions for invigilators across different centers.'
Additionally, the petition asserted that there was a violation of the right to education protected under Article 21A and the right to equality safeguarded under Article 14 of the Constitution of India, stemming from a failure to properly consider the release of an incorrect provisional answer key.
It further stated that the issuance of an incorrect provisional answer key for approximately 12 questions indicated a careless approach in conducting the examination by the Consortium of NLUs.
The petitioners argued that their right to education was compromised by the exorbitant fees levied for the examination and for submitting objections, along with an arbitrary and limited timeframe for disputing the final answer key prior to the announcement of CLAT 2025 results and registration for admission counseling.
Despite charging a hefty fee of Rs 4,000 for the examination, the Consortium only accepted objections upon payment of an additional Rs 1,000 per objection.
'There is no justification for imposing such a high fee for objections raised due to errors made by the consortium in releasing the incorrect provisional answer key,' the petition stated.
It also claimed that the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution was violated due to the failure of invigilators to adhere to the Test Day Instructions provided to the candidates.
