The Delhi High Court on Wednesday set aside a notification issued by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) which sought to recruit lawyers by factoring in Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) Post Graduate (PG) exam scores secured from 2022 onwards [Shannu Baghel vs Union of India & Anr.].
The Division Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela pronounced the verdict today. The Court had earlier stayed the NHAI notification while reserving its judgment in the matter.
"The writ petition is allowed and the recruitment criteria of August 11 is hereby quashed," it said today, pronouncing the operative portion of the judgment today.
During hearings, the Court had questioned how CLAT PG exam scores could be used for employment purposes, when they were envisioned to help assess whether a candidate is suited to pursue higher studies.
Today, the Court allowed the public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by a practicing advocate, Shannu Baghel.
Baghel moved the Court against the NHAI’s August 11, 2025 notification seeking engagement of 44 Young Professional (Legal) candidates on the basis of scores secured in CLAT 2022 and subsequent editions of the post graduate law admissions test.
Baghel contended that CLAT PG scores cannot be made the basis of selection for public employment.
“The recruitment is restricted only to candidates who appeared in CLAT 2022 and onward PG , ignoring all other law graduates and practicing advocates who are otherwise fully qualified. The criteria of restricting selection exclusively on the basis of CLAT 2022 onward (Post Graduate) score is arbitrary, irrational,” Baghel's petition added.
It also stated that the notification unfairly excluded several class of persons, such as fresh graduates, practicing advocates and candidates who appeared for CLAT PG before 2022.
NHAI counsel Ankur Mittal defended the recruitment notification, arguing that CLAT scores are not the sole recruitment criterion. Selection will also depend on the experience a candidate holds in arbitration, in addition to a personal interview component, he contended.
However, the Court was not persuaded by this argument.
“How can this exam be a qualification? LLB is eligibility. It is a public employment, such a provision hits Article 16," the Chief Justice orally observed during hearings.
Advocates Aakash, Saksham Kumar, Vikas, Ganpat Ram and Yash Chaudhary appeared for the petitioner Advocate Shannu Baghel, who also appeared personally.
Advocates Monika Arora, Neha Sharma and Karnika Bahuguna appeared for Union of India.
Standing Counsel Ankur Mittal with advocate Rabaica Jaiswal appeared for NHAI.