PACE students push back against NLSIU decision to nullify formative assessment

The National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru is facing pushback from students enrolled in its Post Graduate Diploma programmes under the Professional and Continuing Education (PACE) initiative..This, after the University nullified the results of an online Formative Assessment (FA) conducted in January 2026 and unilaterally shifted the entire course evaluation to a single 100-mark offline Summative Assessment (SA)..The PACE programme's evaluation structure at the time of the January examination comprised a 40-mark online FA and a 60-mark offline SA. This was itself a revision from an earlier framework of two formative assessments worth 20 and 30 marks respectively, changed by the University in November 2025. Students, a majority of whom are practicing legal professionals, appeared for the FA on January 17 and 18 using their personal devices as instructed.In a communication to students on March 11, NLSIU notified that the PACE Council had resolved on February 23 to withdraw the FA entirely. The University cited "widespread irregularities and the use of unfair means by a considerable number of students," but acknowledged it was "not feasible" to identify individual wrongdoers. On that basis, it applied a blanket cancellation and replaced the evaluation structure with a single 100-mark offline examination in June..Students have responded with detailed written representations to the University.One student argued that the NLSIU had already altered the evaluation structure once in November 2025 and that a second unilateral revision, after the examination had already been conducted, was wholly impermissible."Having conducted the said 40-mark Formative Assessment, the University cannot now nullify the same and change the assessment structure to a 100-mark Summative Assessment under any circumstances whatsoever," the student wrote.The same student alleged that the FA itself was poorly administered. They claimed that several students were not admitted into the virtual examination room until after the scheduled start time and argued that having chosen to conduct the FA online, NLSIU was duty-bound to anticipate cheating and build systems to prevent it."The decision to nullify the Formative Assessment therefore amounts to an arbitrary and retrospective alteration of the evaluation structure after the examination has already been conducted, defeating the legitimate expectation of students who participated in the assessment in accordance with the rules communicated by the University," they stated..Another student said,“Your administrative failure is not my problem,” They have demanded a full refund and formally notified the University of their withdrawal from the programme. The student added that working at a law firm left no room for the schedule adjustments required by wholly offline examinations. They added that they had already faced professional consequences, including reprimands from their employer, for accommodating the January FA..Running through several of the student representations is a consistent argument - that even if some students engaged in malpractice, the University was obligated to identify them individually, afford each a fair hearing and proceed through its disciplinary framework and not impose a blanket penalty on the entire cohort."Administrative inconvenience, inability to monitor the examination effectively, or lack of adequate infrastructure cannot possibly justify the imposition of a blanket penalty upon all students," one student wrote, adding that courts have repeatedly deprecated such approaches in academic evaluation matters.Students have also invoked the doctrine of legitimate expectation, arguing that by conducting the FA and collecting fees on the basis of a clearly communicated evaluation structure, NLSIU created an enforceable commitment it cannot now unilaterally abandon..The University's position.In its communication, NLSIU maintained that examination integrity was non-negotiable and that the blanket decision was taken in the interest of fairness to students who had not cheated. The June summative examination, it said, would be conducted in person under controlled conditions with University invigilators.