Delhi HC restricts Guru Gobind IP University from adopting CLAT scores for LLB admissions

The Delhi High Court has passed an interim order restricting the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSIPU) from adopting CLAT scores for admissions to its LLB courses for the academic session 2019-20..GGSIPU has been directed to reflect this order on its website so that all stakeholders would be aware of the same..The interim order was passed by a Single Judge Bench of Justice C Hari Shankar in a petition by Self-Financing Educational Institutions Association..The Petitioner is an association of twelve private Colleges which provide LL.B. degree and are affiliated to GGSIPU..The ire of the Petitioner was directed against a February 11, 2019 order by the Directorate of Higher Education, Delhi Government, and a subsequent February 26, 2019 circular issued by GGSIPU..The order had permitted GGSIPU to adopt the National Level Tests for admission to certain Courses from the academic year 2019-20, while designating it as the “designated agency” for the Tests in terms of the Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibitions of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence) Act, 2007..One of these National Level Tests were CLAT-UG and CLAT-PG..Accordingly, the Circular announced that GGSIPU was likely to admit students in the law programmes for the Academic Session 2019-20, through CLAT-UG and CLAT-PG..The grievance of the Petitioner was against the stipulation that the GGSIPU could adopt the scores in CLAT which is conducted by a Consortium of National Law Universities, for admission to undergraduate Law courses offered by Colleges affiliated to it..The Petitioner argued that the two notifications were in the teeth of the provisions of Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibitions of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence) Act, 2007..It was argued that a Common Entrance Test (CET) was required to be conducted by a ‘designated agency’ and there was no provision in the Act which permitted adoption of the score of another agency in order to effect admissions to courses in an institution..Therefore, the CET would necessarily have to be held by the GGSIPU itself – as had been happening in the past – and counselling would also have to be conducted by the same University, it was contended..The Petitioner also stated that the deliberations which led to the decision to adopt the score of the CLAT did not disclose any categorical rationale behind the decision. It was also contended that the deliberations did not co-opt the representatives of the Petitioner, who are vital stakeholders in the entire exercise..GGSIP, on the other hand, contended that once the order authorized that CLAT would be deemed to be a CET conducted by the designated agency for admission to courses of the GGSIPU, no infraction of the provisions of the 2007 Act could be said to exist..It was also stated that contrary to the Petitioner’s submissions, the Act did not require the counselling to be conducted by the designated agency which held the CET..GGSIPU was in the process of entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Consortium of NLUs which conducts the CLAT, in order to enable the scores of the CLAT to be adopted for admission to the law courses being conducted under its aegis, it was additionally submitted..The Court observed that prima facie, the Act does not require the institution which is affecting admissions through a CET to itself be the designated agency which conducts the said test..It, however, stated that there was no notification designating the agency conducting the CLAT as the designated agency for effecting admissions to courses being conducted by the GGSIPU for the academic session 2019-2020..The Court, therefore, held that the in the absence of any such notification, prima facie, the entire exercise of adoption of the scores of the CLAT for making admissions to the law courses conducted by the GGSIPU was completely vitiated..“The 2007 Act does not, anywhere, provide for adoption, by one institution, of the score in the examination, conducted by another institution, even if the latter institutions were to be conferred “designated agency” status. The sequitur, of conferment, on such latter institution, of the status of a “designated agency”, would be that admissions to the institution could be made on the basis of examinations conducted by such designated agency. It would not clothe the institution with the authority to adopt scores in the examination conducted by such designated agency, where the agency was not actually designated, for that year, to conduct examinations, for admissions to the institution in question.”.The Court thus concluded that the entire exercise of adoption of the score of the CLAT, as a basis for effecting admissions to law courses conducted by the GGSIPU was prima facie completely contrary to the provisions of the 2007 Act..The Court also rejected GGSIPU’s submission that it was too late in the day for the GGSIPU to conduct a CET for admissions into the LLB course..While granting an interim stay on the adoption of CLAT score by GGSIPU, the Court also clarified that the order would not in any manner affect any admissions in the past to any course conducted by the GGSIPU..The Petitioner was represented by Senior Advocate Rajiv Bansal with Advocates Sameer Rohatgi, Namit Suri, Kunal Kumar, Akshit Pradhan, Soumya Sarin, Dipender Chauhan and Parul Panthi. The petition was filed through Lex Indis..GGSIPU was represented by Senior Advocate Mukul Talwar and Advocate Anita Sahani..The case would be heard next on May 23..Read the order: