CLAT UG 2025: SC ‘anguished' over NLU consortium's ‘casual manner' of framing questions
The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed anguish over the 'casual manner' in which the Consortium of National Law Universities was framing questions for the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT).
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih, which pointed out mistakes related to some of the questions in the CLAT UG-2025, was hearing a plea filed by an aspirant challenging the Delhi High Court's April 23 verdict.
The high court had previously directed the consortium to revise the marksheets and republish the final list of selected candidates of CLAT UG-2025 within four weeks.
'At the outset, we must express our anguish at the casual manner in which the respondent number one (consortium) has been framing the questions for the CLAT examination which involves the career aspirations of lakhs of students in the country,' the top court said.
The CLAT 2025 for admissions to five-year law (LLB) courses in national law universities was held on December 1 last year and the results were declared on December 7.
The petitioner claimed being aggrieved by the high court verdict directing revision of marksheets.
The top court said in matters of academia, court was always 'very slow' in interfering as it did not possess the expertise in such issues.
'When academicians themselves err in such a manner which affects the careers of lakhs of students, the court is left with no other option,' it added.
The bench said it was clear from the high court's verdict that several questions were found not suitable and, therefore, the high court passed an order in relation to the several questions.
The apex court dealt with six questions in the matter.
On one of the questions over environmental issues, the bench referred to the answer key which said the fundamental duty to preserve and protect natural resources was only upon the state.
'It is totally wrong,' the bench said, 'time and again, the apex court has emphasised the duty of the state as well as the citizens to preserve and protect the natural resources'.
It directed the consortium to give a positive marking to all such candidates who chose option C and D in the answer key.
The bench said those who chose option A and B, would be marked negatively.
The apex court further set aside the high court's direction for deleting another question and ordered the consortium to give marks to those who chose option B in the answer key.
The bench was in agreement with the high court on another question and said C was the correct option.
On two more questions, the bench observed the consortium on its own deleted one of them.
The top court found 'not much difference between the two' and ordered deletion of the other.
Two more questions–one entailing a detailed mathematical analysis–were ordered to be deleted.
The bench referred to its June 2018 order in another case highlighting improper conduct of CLAT 2018.
In the judgement, it said, the top court directed the Centre to appoint a committee to look into the issue and take remedial measures including penal action, if any, against the body entrusted with the task.
Though the judgement came in June 2018, it noted, the Centre took no steps.
The bench then issued a notice to the Centre for its response and posted the matter on May 16.
During the hearing, the bench asked why a permanent mechanism for conducting CLAT did not exist.
On April 30, the apex court stayed the high court verdict directing the consortium to revise the marksheets and republish the final list of selected candidates of CLAT UG-2025 within four weeks.
Multiple pleas were filed in different high courts, alleging errors in the questions but on February 6, the Supreme Court transferred all cases to the Delhi High Court for a 'consistent adjudication' after the Consortium of National Law Universities filed transfer petitions.
On December 20, 2024, a Delhi High Court single judge bench directed the consortium to revise the result of CLAT-2025 over the errors in the answer key and then following a challenge the court's division bench on April 23 accepted certain objections of the candidates while rejecting some of them.
The high court is yet to hear pleas challenging the questions of CLAT PG-2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
35 minutes ago
- News18
EC Cites Privacy, Legal Concerns After Congress Demands Polling Booth CCTV Footage
Last Updated: The Election Commission cited privacy and legal issues in response to Rahul Gandhi's demand for CCTV footage of polling stations. Gandhi urged publishing digital voter rolls. Following a demand made by Congress MP and Lok Sabha LoP Rahul Gandhi, the Election Commission on Saturday cited privacy and legal hurdles while sharing the CCTV footage of webcasting of the polling stations. This comes after Rahul Gandhi has called upon the Election Commission to publish consolidated, digital, machine-readable voter rolls for the most recent elections to the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabhas of all states, including Maharashtra, saying that 'telling the truth" will protect the poll panel's credibility. ECI said that the seemingly legitimate appeal of releasing the videos or CCTV footage from polling stations on election day undermines voter privacy and security, contradicting the Representation of the People Act and Supreme Court guidelines. 'What is veiled as a very logical demand is actually entirely contrary to the privacy and security concerns of the voters, legal position laid down in the Representation of the People Act, 1950/1951 and the directions of the Supreme Court of India," it said. 'Sharing of the footage, which would enable easy identification of the electors by any group or an individual, would leave both the elector who has voted as well as the elector who has not voted vulnerable to pressure, discrimination and intimidation by anti-social elements," the poll body added. It said that if a particular political party gets a lesser number of votes in a particular booth, it would easily be able to identify, through the CCTV footage, which elector has voted and which elector has not, and thereafter, may harass or intimidate the electors. The Election Commission further issued a point-by-point rebuttal to the Congress MP. . In any election, there may be electors who decide not to vote. Sharing of video footage of the poll day may result in the identification of such electors. This can also lead to profiling of the voters who voted as well as those who did not vote, which may become the basis for discrimination, denial of services, intimidation or inducement. Supreme Court order: The Supreme Court held that the right to vote includes the right not to vote, and the right of secrecy is accorded to even those persons who have decided not to vote. Video footage: Polling day videography records the sequence of voters entering the polling station and their identities, similar to Form 17A, which contains sensitive information about voters, including their ID details and signatures. Both pose a risk to voting secrecy. Violation of secrecy of voting is a punishable offence under Section 128 of RP Act, 1951 for – Any person who contravenes the provisions of this section is punishable with imprisonment for a term expending up to 3 months or fine or both.
Mint
2 hours ago
- Mint
Israel-Iran conflict: Tehran hangs Majid Mosayebi, alleged Mossad agent, third execution since April
Iranian authorities executed on Sunday a man convicted of being an agent for Israel's Mossad spy service, the judiciary said, as fighting raged between the two foes for the tenth day. According to an AFP report, judiciary's Mizan Online website said, 'Majid Mosayebi... was hanged this morning after going through the full process of criminal procedure and after his sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court,' adding that Mosayebi sought to provide 'sensitive information ... to Mossad'. Iranian authorities have carried out multiple arrests of people suspected of spying for Israel since its attack on June 13, the report added. Mizan did not mention when Moseybi was arrested. According to the report, Iran had executed a man convicted of spying for Israeli intelligence agency Mossad, the judiciary said on May 28. "After identification, arrest, and judicial proceedings against Pedram Madani, who was spying in favour of the Zionist regime, and following the complete process of criminal procedure and the final confirmation and upholding of the verdict by the Supreme Court, he was brought to justice and executed," Mizan Online reported. According to the report, Madani was accused of transmitting classified information and holding meetings with Mossad officers abroad, including in Brussels. The judiciary said he had travelled to "the occupied territories" – the term used by Iranian officials to describe Israel – prior to his arrest in 2020-2021. He was also convicted of acquiring "illicit wealth" by receiving euros and bitcoin from Israel, the report added. Mizan added that Madani was ultimately found guilty of "espionage on behalf of the Zionist regime's intelligence service (Mossad)" under charges of waging war against God and "corruption on earth", and sentenced to death. The report did not detail Madani's age, profession or how he obtained the classified information. His case follows a string of similar executions in Iran targeting individuals accused of collaborating with Israel. In April, Iran executed Mohsen Langarneshin for allegedly aiding Mossad in the 2022 assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Colonel Hassan Sayyad Khodaei in Tehran. Authorities said Langarneshin provided technical support to Mossad and met with Israeli agents overseas. According to an AP report, the US military struck three sites in Iran early Sunday, inserting itself into Israel's effort to decapitating Iran's nuclear program in a risky gambit to weaken a longtime foe amid Tehran's threat of reprisals that could spark a wider regional conflict. The decision to directly involve the US comes after more than a week of strikes by Israel on Iran that have moved to systematically eradicate the country's air defenses and offensive missile capabilities, while damaging its nuclear enrichment facilities, an AP report said. But US and Israeli officials have said that American stealth bombers and a 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) bunker buster bomb they alone can carry offered the best chance of destroying heavily fortified sites connected to the Iranian nuclear program buried deep underground, the report added. President Donald Trump announced the strikes. Iran's state-run IRNA news agency reported that attacks targeted the country's Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites. The agency did not elaborate. Iran's foreign minister said Iran reserves the right to retaliate.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
'Provided sensitive information': Iran executes alleged Mossad spy; dozens detained since Israeli strikes
Representative image As the conflict between Iran and Israel entered its tenth day, Iranian authorities on Sunday executed a man convicted of spying for Israel's Mossad intelligence agency, according to the country's judiciary. "Majid Mosayebi... was hanged this morning after going through the full process of criminal procedure and after his sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court," the judiciary-run Mizan online website reported. He had been accused of attempting to provide sensitive information to Mossad. Mosayebi's case is the latest in a series of similar executions. In May, Iranian authorities executed Mohsen Langarneshin Pedram Madani, also convicted of spying for Mossad. Since Israel's attack on June 13, Iranian authorities have made several arrests of individuals suspected of spying for Israel. The execution comes the same day as US bombed Iran's three nuclear facilities, following which, Tehran carried out retaliatory strikes on Tel Aviv and targeted strategic sites in Israel. Iran's revolutionary guards said they won't be intimidated by the noise made by Trump 'or criminal gangs ruling the White House and Tel Aviv' and warned that US has places itself directly 'at the front line of aggression' by attacking nuclear sites.
