•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student
other

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
Subscribe for perks & to support LI

██████ hails new group general counsel: ██████ ██████ ██████ joins sprawling tech-taxi empire

106 people have already read this article, which will unlock for non-subscribers like you in . So what are you waiting for? Subscribe now!

First CLAT 2012 writ dismissed without hearing, as CLAT committee mulls petitioners’ grievances

post CLAT hangover
post CLAT hangover

The first writ against Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2012 convener NLU Jodhpur was dismissed by the Delhi high court which refrained from hearing the matter which was listed for the first time yesterday. The court refused to interfere stating that the CLAT committee was already considering the petitioners’ grievances.

It was however observed that recourse to legal remedy will be open to the petitioners once the result of the examination was declared.

Justice Sunil Gaur dismissed the matter in limine, not commenting on whether CLAT 2012 exam questions disputed in the petition were out of course, reported legal website Bar and Bench.

Three CLAT takers had filed a civil writ petition in the court on 24 May 2012 against the vice chancellor and registrar of this year’s CLAT convener - NLU Jodhpur, the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the ministry of human resource and development, for questioning the examinees on topics which were out of the syllabus prescribed by the CLAT committee for 2012.

Senior advocate Sandeep Sethi appearing for NLU Jodhpur told the court that the CLAT committee’s meeting was convened in Jodhpur yesterday to deliberate on the petitioners’ grievances, and the committee intended to take a decision soon.

The judge reasoned that since the committee which disputed the contention that some of the questions were out of syllabus, was nevertheless deliberating on the grievances, the court should not interfere in “a technical matter in the academic field”.

Senior advocate Jayant Bhushan argued for the petitioners that questions which were out of the syllabus could not be considered in the evaluation procedure, relying on the Delhi high court’s judgment in Gunjan Sinha V Registrar General, High Court of Delhi.

Gaur however cited the ratio in Gunjan Sinha to observe that the examination had been challenged after declaration of results, in that case. He further cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Sanchit Bansal & Anr v Joint Admission Board & Ors where it was held that courts should not interfere in evaluation procedures on grounds of inaccuracy or inefficiency, but only on the ground of mala fides or arbitrariness.

Legally India had reported that a second writ seeking to cancel the NLU Jodhpur organised CLAT 2012 was filed, also by a CLAT 2012 taker, in the Allahbad high court on the same day as the Delhi high court writ. The writ is listed for hearing on 28 May 2012.

CLAT 2012 was held on 13 May 2012 when Legally India had first reported that several aspirants displeased with questions requiring knowledge of “Static GK” and prior legal knowledge planned to file a public interest litigation against the examination committee for 2012, which on its website had eliminated these parts from the syllabus.

Click to show 18 comments
at your own risk
(alt+c)
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.

Latest comments