The Delhi High Court on Tuesday took strong objection the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) charging an exorbitant amount of ₹1,000 per question for raising objections to the provisional answer key in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 for postgraduate (PG) courses.
The bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said that people from different financial backgrounds give the exam and the amount could be monthly income for someone.
"How do you justify ₹1000 for challenging the questions? All sorts of people are giving the exam. It is prohibitory cost. You are answerable to people of all background. It may be monthly income for someone. This is in terrorem," Justice Gedela said.
The Court was hearing a batch of matters filed challenging the errors in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 for postgraduate (PG) courses that was held on December 1, 2024.
Advocate Siddharth R Gupta, appearing for two candidates, told the Court that no other national level exam charges such high registration fee and cost for raising objection to questions.
"Already you are taking ₹4000 rupees as registration fee. It cannot be milch cow for the Consortium to earn profits," he said.
Regarding the cost charged for raising objections, the Consortium told the Court that the cost is refunded immediately if the challenge is upheld.
It was submitted that a high cost is charged for deterring frivolous objections. Further, calling experts and checking objections is a time-taking process that justifies the cost.
The NLU Consortium also submitted before Court that it has decided to withdraw four questions on its own.
It informed the Court that the counselling process in the PG course has been halted in light of the petitions.
Meanwhile, the Court noted that the objections were not filed by the petitioner-candidates within the one day window period given by the NLU Consortium.
Initially, a total of eight questions were challenged before the Court. Thereafter, the Consortium held an internal meeting on April 4 and withdrew four of these questions. In the hearing yesterday, arguments were heard on the remaining four questions.
After the Court reserved its verdict, advocate Gupta flagged a "glaring" issue with respect to one question. The correct option published in the question paper distributed to candidates was different from the option given in the master booklet made by the Consortium, it was pointed out.
The Consortium then chose to withdraw this question. A joint note was submitted informing the Court of this new development.
This means that the Court will now rule on the objections to three questions on which it has reserved the order.
Advocates Siddharth R Gupta, Aman Agarwal, Shravan Lahoti and Uddaish Palya appeared for the petitioners, Anam Khan and Ayush Agarwal.
Senior Advocate Kaadambri Singh appeared for another petitioner Nitika.
Advocate Arun Shrikumar appeared for the Consortium of NLUs.
[Read live coverage]