Supreme Court: In a special leave petition challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to revise the merit list of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) Undergraduate (UG) 2025 admissions, the Division Bench of BR Gavai and Augustine George Masih, J. issued a notice and stayed the impugned decision in interim order.
In a batch of petitions by law aspirants in Shivraj Sharma v. Consortium of National Law Universities, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 2589 around the conduct, evaluation, and answer key disputes in CLAT 2025, administered by the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs), the High Court directed the Consortium to revise the marksheet and to re-publish/renotify the final list of selected candidates within four weeks from the date. The High Court undertook a granular question-by-question analysis.
The High Court held that the error as occurred on the part of the respondent/Consortium itself, while publishing Sets ‘B’, ‘C’ & ‘D’ of question papers, no fault can be found with the candidates for giving or not giving correct or incorrect answers. It was directed that all the candidates who participated in CLAT UG 2025 with respect to the Sets ‘B’, ‘C’ & ‘D’ of question papers shall, as a consequence, be granted the marks indicated against the said question. Since Set ‘A’ did not have this error, we do not deem it fit to interfere with the marks obtained by all those candidates who answered correctly.
The High Court declined to quash any answer key changes made by the Oversight Committee and upheld all changes made in response to expert evaluations. The High Court also emphasised that in competitive examinations, the role of the Court is minimal, especially when procedural fairness and expert advice have been diligently followed.
Source: Press
[[Siddhi Sandeep Ladda v. Consortium of National Law Universities, Diary No. 22324-2025]]