The Supreme Court dismissed a petition challenging procedural issues during the CLAT PG 2025 exam, advising petitioners Anam Khan and Ayush Agrawal to approach the High Court. Concerns included late question booklet distribution, answer key errors, and exorbitant objection fees. The Court refused to stay admissions, allowing the counseling process to continue as planned.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Dec 9th declined to entertain a petition alleging procedural lapses and arbitrary treatment during the Common Law Admission Test Post Graduate (CLAT PG 2025) exam, held on December 1, 2024. The petition, filed by Anam Khan and Ayush Agrawal, raised concerns over errors in the answer key, inconsistencies in examination procedures, and excessive fees for objections.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar advised the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional High Court instead of directly filing in the Supreme Court.
“We Are Not the Court of First Instance”
The Bench underscored the precedent that the Supreme Court cannot act as the first forum for such grievances.
“We are not inclined to entertain the Article 32 petition. Petitioners may approach the jurisdictional High Court,”
the Court stated.
It also denied the petitioners’ request to stay the CLAT PG 2025 admission process, observing, “The balance of convenience is not in favor of stay.”
Issues Highlighted in the Petition
The petitioners alleged procedural inconsistencies and a lack of fairness during the conduct of the exam, including:
- Delayed Question Booklet Distribution:
- Anam Khan, who appeared at Government Law College, Mumbai, received her question booklet at 1:50 PM, per schedule.
- Ayush Agrawal, at Acropolis Institute of Law, Indore, was handed his booklet after 2:00 PM, reducing his allotted exam time.
This, the petitioners argued, violated Article 14 of the Constitution, ensuring equality.
- Errors in Answer Key:
- At least 12 questions in the provisional answer key were allegedly incorrect, undermining the merit ranking system.
- High Fees for Objections:
- Candidates were charged Rs 1,000 per objection, which the petitioners deemed unreasonable given that the errors stemmed from the Consortium’s oversight.
- Compressed Timeline for Results and Counseling:
- The final answer key was released on December 9, followed by results on December 10 and counseling registration on December 11.
- The petition argued this timeline did not allow sufficient time for candidates to seek legal recourse.
Supreme Court’s Observations
CJI Khanna commented on the fee objection, stating, “Rs 1,000 per student is not a big deal; do you know how much expenditure is incurred?” He added that there have been past cases where result delays due to OMR sheets spanned years.
When petitioners highlighted logistical challenges for candidates across states, the Bench suggested they seek permission to approach the Delhi High Court, saying, “They can go to Delhi High Court… You can take permission and file.”
Next Steps for Candidates
The Court emphasized the petitioners should file their grievances with a relevant High Court, particularly the Delhi High Court, for effective redressal. The refusal to stay the results ensures that the counseling process for CLAT PG 2025 will proceed as scheduled. The CLAT PG 2025 results, published on December 10, 2024, and the ensuing counseling process, remain unaffected by the petition.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES