Delhi High Court quashes NHAI notification on recruitment of lawyers based on CLAT PG score

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. "We are of the opinion that in the instant case if the impugned criteria of recruitment does not satisfy the test of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, inasmuch as that no rational nexus is established for providing such recruitment criteria with the object sought to be achieved, the recruitment criteria as prescribed in the notification dated 11.08.2025 will have to be struck down ... The writ petition is allowed and the recruitment criteria of August 11 is hereby quashed," the Court held. .The Court reasoned that the CLAT PG exam is designed to determine a candidate's aptitude for pursuing higher study courses, and not their suitability for employment. "Criteria employed for judging the suitability of a candidate for pursuing higher studies cannot be employed for the purposes of adjudging his suitability for public employment ... Skills for employability may be different than the skills and suitability required for pursuing higher courses of study, and accordingly, even if the syllabus of CLAT (PG) covers various substantive procedural laws, the same, in our opinion, does not justify adopting the score in CLAT (PG) examination for the purposes of offering employment," it ruled. .The Court also found that the NHAI's recruitment notification was absolutely vague as it did not specify the benchmark or the cut-off for the score secured in CLAT PG exam, which could make a candidate eligible to participate in the recruitment. In effect even candidates who merely appeared for the PG exam without scoring any marks could also be treated as eligible to participate in the recruitment, the Court noted. "By not prescribing any minimum score or benchmark to be obtained by a candidate in CLAT (PG) Examination, merely by appearance in the said examination a candidate becomes eligible though he may secure no marks at all in the said examination. Such a prescription belies any reason whatsoever ... This criterion is absolutely vague for the reason that as per the said criteria even if a candidate has secured Zero or Nil marks on his appearance in CLAT (PG) examination, he shall be eligible, whereas if a candidate has not appeared in the CLAT (PG) examination, he shall be ineligible," the Court stated. .Criteria employed for judging the suitability of a candidate for pursuing higher studies cannot be employed for adjudging his suitability for public employment.Delhi High Court .The Court further observed that the NHAI notification is discriminatory with respect to candidates who do not take CLAT PG exam but participate in other selection procedures adopted by non-NLU Central or State Universities..The Court passed the ruling on a 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 had 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, Gorang Goyal, Vikas, Ganpat Ram, Saksham Kumar, Disha Gupta, Shubham Prajapati and Jitendra Kumar appeared for the petitioner Advocate Shannu Baghel, who also appeared personally. Central Government Standing Counsel Monika Arora with Advocates Subhro Deep Saha, Prabhat Kumar, Anamika Thakur and Abhinav Verma appeared for Union of India. Standing Counsel Ankur Mittal with advocates Rabaica Jaiswal, Neha Sharma and Karnika Bhargava appeared for NHAI..[Read Judgment]