The Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2015 convenor will again form an expert committee to look into allegedly incorrect CLAT 2015 LLM questions and revise the LLM merit list accordingly, on the directions of the Chhattisgarh high court.

Legally India understands that the high court yesterday ordered the convenor RMLNLU Lucknow, in a decision similar to that of the Bombay high court for the LLB entrance paper, to “expeditiously” form the expert panel to look into the alleged errors and revise the merit list according to the outcome of the panel’s scrutiny.

The court was hearing writ petition WP(C) No. 1025 of 2015, filed by CLAT 2015 LLM entrance candidate Anuradha Jain who had challenged this year’s exam based on the alleged inaccuracy of nine questions, which Legally India had published on 7 June. These alleged inaccuracies were in addition to the six inaccuracies already confirmed by the convenor.

RMLNLU had on 6 June admitted that there were six questions with inaccurate answers in the CLAT 2015 LLM entrance exam. The inaccuracies were confirmed by the first expert committee which was formed shortly after the LLB and LLM entrance results were first declared by the convenor.

The court delivered the order, a copy of which is not yet available online or offline, at 4pm yesterday, based on the following written submission of RMLNLU’s counsel Sumesh Bajaj:

That, though, strictly speaking, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief whatsoever, but in all earnestness the answering respondent respectfully submits that a similar litigation has been already decided on 2.7.2015 by the Hon’ble High Court at Bombay in Writ Petition (Lodging) No. 1784 of 2015 parties being Mr Shubham Dutt – Versus – the convenor CLAT 2015 and others. […] Thus in view of this judgment, the answering respondent proposes that the instant writ petition can also be disposed of in similar terms and the 9 questions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition can also be referred to the Expert Panel/Committee and the decision of the Panel/Committee can be made applicable to all the students taking the post-graduation CLAT 2015 examinations.

The Bombay high court gave the convenor eight days for the entire process of forming the panel and revising the merit list if required, whereas the Chhatisgarh high court simply ordered the covenor to achieve the same result “expeditiously”.

CLAT secretariat head and RMLNLU joint registrar Dr JD Gangwar did not respond to messages seeking comment since yesterday.

Photo by Andy Mabbett