CLAT UG 2025: Delhi High Court says errors in 4 questions; orders NLU Consortium to publish revised results

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ruled that there were errors in four questions and answers in this year's Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) for undergraduate (UG) courses..A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ordered the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to revise the marksheets of the candidates and publish/renotify the final list of selected candidates within four weeks."In view of the aforesaid detailed analysis and conclusions, we direct the respondent/Consortium to revise the marksheet and to republish/renotify the final list of selected candidates within 04 weeks from date. It is clarified that the respondent/Consortium shall apply the aforesaid evaluation to each of the appellant and petitioners before this Court, the candidates who may have attempted certain questions considered hereinabove as also all the candidates in respect of whom certain benefits can be granted in view of the aforesaid analysis. Resultantly, the appeals as also the writ petitions are disposed of," the Court directed.The following are the erroneous questions/ answers: - Question no. 5 of master booklet: Incorrect option given in answer key; option (c) is the correct answer; all candidates who marked option (c) to get the benefit.- Question no 77 of master booklet: Out of syllabus to be excluded and treated as withdrawn. Students who marked the correct answer will lose their mark, and the students who marked the wrong answer would gain 0.25 marks that they lost by negative marking.- Question 115 of master booklet: The answer in option (a), “Rs.204 approx” as provided in the provisional answer key has been found to be incorrect and the answer in option (d), “None of these” is the correct answer. All candidates who attempted this question will get full marks.- Question 116 of master booklet: All the candidates who participated in CLAT UG 2025 with respect to the Sets B, C & D of question papers shall be granted the marks indicated against the said question. Since Set A did not have this error, the Court deemed it fit not to interfere with the marks obtained by all those candidates who answered correctly..The Court refused to interfere with respect to answers to questions 14, 37, 49, 56, 78, 79, 80, 81, 88, 91, 93 and 97 of the master booklet. .The judgment was passed in a batch of petitions related to the CLAT 2025 exams after the Supreme Court ordered their transfer from various High Courts to the Delhi High Court..On December 20, 2024, single-judge Justice Jyoti Singh had partly allowed a plea filed by a 17-year-old CLAT candidate Aditya Singh, regarding certain errors alleged in the CLAT UG paper.This ruling was challenged before a division bench of the High Court, with the NLU Consortium contending that the single-judge had wrongly donned the hat of an expert. The CLAT candidate also filed an appeal before the division bench, seeking a further revision of his result. Later, the NLU Consortium moved the Supreme Court seeking a transfer of the matter to the top court. Petitions challenging the CLAT results were under challenge before the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Bombay High Court, among other High Courts. To avoid such parallel proceedings, the NLU Consortium urged the Supreme Court to transfer the case to a single court which was allowed by the top court.The matter then came to be heard by the present Division Bench of the High Court..Petitions concerning the CLAT PG exam are also pending before the Delhi High Court and are being considered separately by the same Bench. .Advocates Niyati Kohli, Rishab Parakh and Prathambir Agarwal appeared for candidate Shivraj Sharma.Petitioner-in-person Yajat Sen appeared in his matter.Advocates Dhanesh Relan, Arjeet Gaur, Naveen Malik, Suryansh Jamwal and Sakshi Arora appeared for Aditya Singh.Advocates T Archana, Archit Mishra and Digvijay appeared for Harshita.Advocate T Archana appeared for Tiambak Eashwar.Advocates Yash Dadriwal and Amol Jagtap appeared for Prabhas Kumar.Senior Advocate Ajay Vohra with Advocates Aniket D Agrawal and Ram Krishna Rao appeared for Hardik Garg and Harshit Garg.Advocates Uddyam Mukherjee, Rohit Sinha, Swapnil Pattanayak and Agnibha Chatterjee appeared for A Vaishnavi.Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao with Advocates Arun Sri Kumar, Shubhansh Thakur and Wamic Wasim appeared for the Consortium of NLU[Read Judgment]