The Supreme Court today asked Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2018 convenor Nuals Kochi to appoint an expert committee at the earliest to individually look into at least 251 CLAT 2018 candidates’ grievances with the conduct of the entrance exam this year.
Justices AM Khanwilkar and Navin Sinha heard senior advocate Salman Khurshid for CLAT 2018 candidate Disha Panchal and five other petitioners who had challenged the exam and asked for a stay on the results and for a fresh exam, on the ground that they suffered from precious time lost in answering the paper due to technical glitches in the conduct of the exam.
Senior advocate V Giri appeared for Nuals today and placed on record the computer “log reports” of the petitioners claiming that each of the six petitioners was compensated with extra time for the exact time lost on account of technical glitches.
Nuals also submitted that out of over 59,300 candidates who appeared for the CLAT 2018 LLB and LLM entrance exams, it has received 251 representations so far from aggrieved candidates claiming that they had suffered on account of errors and glitches in the exam, the petitioners’ counsel Anand Shankar Jha told us.
This leaves out possibly up to 2,120 other potentially aggrieved candidates, according to a Google form that had been opened up to responses by a free CLAT tutorial service.
Jha said that the court was of the prima facie view that there were indeed many glitches in the conduct of the exam and that Nuals should appoint a mechanism or constitute a committee to look into each individual grievance.
The judges asked Nuals to propose before the court tomorrow as to how soon it can constitute such a committee and what procedure the committee would follow to address candidates’ grievances.
The court also ordered a stay on the writ proceedings on before five other benches of various high courts by several CLAT 2018 candidates, i.e. before Rajasthan - Jodhpur and Jaipur, Punjab & Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi, making their outcome subject to the decision of the Supreme Court.
Additional solicitor general Pinky Anand appeared for the ministry of human resource development (MHRD), which was also made a respondent in the case.
Jha said that the hearings in the matter will now proceed on a day to day basis and the next hearing is tomorrow.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
The computer logs can be manipulated for all we know and even the cctv recordings can be deleted.NUALS Kochi is trying to wipe it's hands off the big mess that is CLAT 2018.
Any measure by the committee set up by NUALS Kochi is obviously going to cause opposition to it.
Like even if say 10 Grace marks is awarded for time lost like what is the probability that if the candidates didn't lose time they would have got all 10 questions right..and the moment grace marks is announced many people will claim it.
Grace marks won't be sufficient for deserving candidates who could have answered more questions and got more marks than the grace marks awarded in the absence of technical glitches.
Therefore Re exam is the only solution to even the playing field Adamant NUALS Kochi must be taught the error of it's ways.
To all those people saying "it's by students who had a bad exam"...if it was really true then why would the supreme Court and respective high courts even entertain such writ petitions? The Supreme Court could have dismissed the writ petition praying for a RE CLAT 18 just like it dismissed petitions calling for RE NEET 17.Yes it's going to cost money..in 2015 The Supreme Court ordered RE AIPMT .. approximately 11 to 12 lakh wrote the exam.. application fee about 2000..please do the math.
The Court has found substance in the petitions filed. And it's not just UG even PG candidates affected.
Like people against the re exam I am not against you getting a seat in NLS , NALSAR , NUJS and so on.As a serious aspirant I understand the pain , sacrifices, hard work u all did to achieve that .So even if there is a re exam your hard work will definitely pay off.
Just imagine if this happened to you.You worked your heart and soul off for a year or maybe more keeping in your head the dream of you sitting in a premier law school only to have it dashed , broken and shattered in the exam centre.What if your computer submitted the test 30 minutes early and what if in those crucial 30 minutes you could have gotten at least 40 more marks?Would you just go home cry and take a drop? No u will fight to correct the injustice .
Hope the Supreme Court will grant out justice to all.
Here the counsel for the respondent NUALS Kochi has put the "audit" reports before the Supreme Court bench .
Drawing the attention of the bench to the summary in respect of petitioner 1 Disha Panchal , he remarked, “she had taken 2 hours 26 minutes in writing the examination…the report even indicates such details as number of questions…”...
Read more at: www.livelaw.in/breaking-clat-2018-sc-suggest-to-form-nodal-agency-to-examine-the-grievances-of-candidates-asks-nuals-to-reply/
This statement alone forms a basis for the re exam.
If u read the petition closely the petitioner 1 Disha Panchal says that the computer started only at 3 : 35 PM leaving her only 1hr 25 minutes to complete the paper.
BUT the logs by NUALS Kochi shows she got 2hrs 26 mins...either NUALS Kochi manipulated the logs because reasonably thinking why would a student to who got 26 minutes beyond the actual time frame contest before the court for a re exam??
Utter nonsense by NUALS Kochi trying to cover up the mess.
Re exam is the solution as I asserted in my previous comment.
Thank you on behalf of the students who worked hard and cleared CLAT, facing the same obstacles as the mob seeking a retest.
Dear friends, you are addressing us as a “mob seeking retest”, I am glad you have the intellect and the aptitude to complete a 120 minute test in less time and still score graceful marks, but you must know that not everyone is born with the same intellect and the same capabilities. I mean no offense but what about the mass cheating that happened. You may that it happened in only one centre, which came into the limelight, but there could be others too, you know. Congratulations on your marks and I don’t see a problem for you all. Good students will shine again even if there is a retest, there is no need for them to worry, but it’ll be a saving grace for the multiple people who didn’t have the opportunity that day to perform to their fullest.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first