Today, On 9th April, The Delhi High Court questioned whether it is reasonable to expect a Class 12 student to have knowledge of Contract Law while assessing the CLAT 2025 UG paper. This came up during hearings on multiple petitions highlighting alleged errors in the exam. The petitioners argued that the paper included concepts beyond the expected syllabus. The Court has now concluded the hearings and reserved its judgment.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Wednesday reserved its judgment on a series of cases concerning errors in this year’s Common Law Admission Test (CLAT 2025) for undergraduate (UG) admissions.
A bench composed of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela reviewed the objections raised by each petitioner and inquired whether these issues were brought to the attention of the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs), which conducts the CLAT, within the stipulated 24-hour timeframe for filing objections.
During the hearing, a candidate appeared virtually to present his case, arguing that the legal reasoning questions related to Contract Law were beyond the syllabus, as they necessitated prior knowledge of legal concepts such as void and voidable agreements, and consideration.
The Chief Justice remarked to the Consortium,
“You are testing legal understanding of a Class 12th student. He would not know consideration. This is for the experts to decide, but I don’t know. Will it be possible for a Class 12 student to know the meaning of consideration under Contract Law?”
Additionally, the Court separated two petitions from the UG batch for individual consideration. One case involved a candidate who was not permitted to underline on the question paper during the exam, which reportedly affected her focus and wasted time.
Also Read: Supreme Court Transfers All CLAT UG 2025 Result-Related Cases to Delhi High Court
The Court inquired of Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao, representing the Consortium of NLUs, whether any action had been taken by its grievance redressal committee regarding this incident.
Rao acknowledged,
“We should have been more proactive. Our training has to get better.”
Justice Gedela directed the Consortium to submit an additional affidavit detailing its findings on this incident within two weeks. The other segregated matter concerned a candidate requesting a change from the general category to a reserved category.
Regarding the postgraduate (PG) exam issues, the Court is set to begin hearings on April 21.
In the previous day’s hearing, the Court had expressed concerns about the qualifications of legal experts setting questions that assess logical reasoning and quantitative aptitude.
“You say questions are made by experts. For legal questions, GK, we understand. For logical and quantitative questions, they are part of maths; you do not teach maths. Then who sets these questions?”
The Court urged the Consortium to ensure more qualified paper-setters in the future.
The Chief Justice noted,
“Just a thought, you may convey. These are some of the issues the Consortium can consider,”
The Court was informed of conflicting opinions between subject matter experts and the Oversight Committee regarding some questions.
Rao stated,
“At times, examiners can also go wrong. We are dealing with lives of young minds; we have to be more circumspect. We are conscious.”
The Court is handling a series of matters related to the CLAT 2025 exams following an order from the Supreme Court to transfer the cases. On December 20, 2024, single-judge Justice Jyoti Singh partially granted relief to a 17-year-old CLAT candidate, Aditya Singh, concerning alleged errors in the CLAT UG paper.
Also Read: Delhi High Court Questions CLAT 2025 Answer Key Errors, Highlights Justice for Aspirants
This decision was appealed to a division bench of the High Court, with the NLU Consortium arguing that the single judge had overstepped by acting as an expert. The CLAT candidate also appealed for a further revision of his result.
Subsequently, the NLU Consortium approached the Supreme Court to transfer the matter to a single court to avoid parallel proceedings, as petitions challenging the CLAT results were also filed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Bombay High Court, among others. On February 6, the Supreme Court ordered the consolidation of all CLAT-related cases in the Delhi High Court.