•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

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

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences
An estimated 3-minute read

CLAT 2015: Where Ignorance is Bliss, it is Folly to be Wise

 Email  Facebook  Tweet  Linked-in

An anonymous, concerned father of a CLAT aspirant asks some tough questions

You would have had a better chance of scoring a higher rank in CLAT 2015:

  • If you do not know the difference between “censor” and “censure”
  • If you cannot tell “foreign change” from “foreign exchange”
  • If you have no idea whether “Dulcet : Raucous” are synonyms or antonyms
  • If you have never heard of a Chinese e-commerce giant called Alibaba (and not Amazon), which became the biggest international business current affairs news story of 2014 with its global IPO that ranked it number one e-com company in the world in terms of market capitalization
  • If you have never read the following on Wikipedia about the history of Kathak (and not Mohiniyattam) that: “Gradually, what was essentially a solo-dance, moved towards expression in group performances” (Massey, Reginald (2004). India's dances: their history, technique, and repertoire. Abhinav Publications. ISBN 81-7017-434-1)
  • And so on and so forth… (for at least 15 to 25 questions)

Where ignorance is bliss, dear CLAT candidates, it is folly to be wise.

Recent Judgment of Mumbai HC

Just a day before the final merit list of MBBS (MH-CET) 2015 was to be announced, the Bombay High Court replaced the state-appointed expert committee with a new court-appointed expert committee, to examine the validity of just one disputed question.

The court-appointed committee has come up with the conclusion that there is ambiguity in the options of the disputed MCQ. Therefore, every examinee who had attempted the question is being awarded one mark.

Duryodhana-like Stubbornness and False ego

When a king becomes stubborn and blinded by false pride and ego, he shall bring destruction for all. This is the grand lesson of the Mahabharata and the Bhagvad Gita.

However, a Duryodhana can bring destruction only in an autocratic society. In a democratic society, there are systems in place to guard against the insanity of those in power. Impeachment proceedings were initiated against President Nixon, forcing him to resign from office.

Common Sense Questions

Following the Duryodhana-like stubbornness of the CLAT organizers, who are hidden behind an opaque wall of non-accountability:

  • Is it possible to file a case of gross negligence, irresponsible conduct, failure to perform duty, and national disservice – risking the careers of thousands of students – against the CLAT 2015 convener, CLAT 2015 paper-setters, CLAT 2015 expert review committee, and the four vice chancellors who approved CLAT 2015 question paper (as mentioned in a TV interview by RMNLU VC Prof. Gurdip Singh)? This question merits legal scrutiny particularly in the face of the steadfast refusal of this holy group of CLAT 2015 organizers to recognize the enormity of their national responsibility and acknowledge the most obvious mistakes in the question paper.
  • Are the vice chancellors of NLUs above the law, or are they too citizens of India, who can be taken to court?
  • Can the Supreme Court of India take suo motu cognizance of this case, and set new standards for those who are bringing disrepute to CLAT year after year, and turning it into a national laughing stock with their Duryodhana-like stubbornness, as against other respectable national competitive examinations?

Stubbornness, false pride and ego are the characteristics of an ignorant person – because he wants to hide his ignorance behind his false veil of arrogance. Persons of true knowledge have no issues with accepting their mistakes, and rectifying them. Humbleness is the hallmark of truly knowledgeable men.

Mark these words from the Bible, for they shall come true very soon, if someone decides to take this case of CLAT 2015 right up to the Supreme Court: “Do you see a person wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.” (Proverbs 26:12)

Click to show 3 comments
at your own risk
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.