The Delhi High Court has instructed the Consortium of National Law Universities (CNLUs) to revise the marksheets for CLAT UG 2025 and republish the final list of selected candidates within the next four weeks. This decision comes after candidates raised objections regarding errors in the exam’s questionnaire, which were taken into consideration by the court.
The bench, comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, addressed various petitions from candidates who had pointed out discrepancies in certain questions of the Common Law Admission Test. While some objections were accepted, others were dismissed. The court clarified that the consortium should apply the revised evaluation process to the appellants, petitioners, and any candidates who had attempted specific questions under review. It also mandated that the same evaluation be applied to candidates who could benefit from the revisions, ensuring fairness across the board.
This directive follows an earlier decision by a single judge’s bench on December 20, 2024, which had identified errors in the answer key and called for revisions in the results. At that time, the errors in two specific questions were deemed “demonstrably clear,” leading to the revision of the results for the affected candidates. The matter was later transferred to the Delhi High Court after multiple appeals, with the Supreme Court seeking consistent adjudication.
The court’s decision not only impacts the candidates whose results were previously affected by the errors but also sets a precedent for future reviews of exam protocols. The Consortium of National Law Universities has been ordered to ensure that all affected candidates are considered for the revision, and the final list should be updated accordingly. The revised results must be published by the consortium within the specified four-week timeframe.
The decision is part of ongoing legal proceedings over the fairness of the CLAT UG 2025 exam, which saw widespread petitions from candidates challenging specific aspects of the test. The court’s ruling emphasizes transparency and accountability, ensuring that the exam process remains equitable for all candidates involved.
