SC slams CLAT consortium over errors in UG-2025 exam questions, orders mark corrections

Questionable evaluation standards and persistent errors in the CLAT UG-2025 examination came under sharp scrutiny from the Supreme Court on May 7, as it pulled up the Consortium of National Law Universities for its lack of care in preparing the law entrance test.

Hearing a plea by a dissatisfied aspirant, a bench comprising Justices B R Gavai and Augustine George Masih criticized the quality of several questions and took issue with how the consortium handled the evaluation process.

“At the outset, we must express our anguish at the casual manner in which the respondent number one (consortium) has been framing the questions for the CLAT examination, which involves the career aspirations of lakhs of students in the country,” the court observed.

The case stemmed from a challenge to the Delhi High Court’s April 23 verdict, which directed the consortium to revise the marksheets and publish an updated list of selected candidates within four weeks.

The top court noted that although courts generally avoid interference in academic matters, the scale of the errors left it with no choice.

“When academicians themselves err in such a manner that affects the careers of lakhs of students, the court is left with no other option,” the bench said.

The apex court addressed six specific questions from the exam. In one instance, the answer key incorrectly suggested that the duty to protect natural resources lay solely with the state.

“It is totally wrong,” the bench said, reminding that both citizens and the state share this responsibility.

As a remedy, it directed that candidates selecting options C or D receive positive marks, while those choosing A or B be penalized.

The bench overturned the high court's order deleting another question and ruled that marks be awarded to those who picked option B. It also upheld the high court’s stance on a separate question, affirming option C as correct.

The court addressed other questions as well, directing the deletion of two—one of which required complex mathematical reasoning—and acknowledged that the consortium had already removed another problematic item.

“Not much difference between the two,” the bench remarked when comparing two similar flawed questions.

In revisiting earlier concerns about CLAT’s administration, the bench referenced its 2018 judgment, which called for the center to investigate the conduct of CLAT 2018 and consider punitive or corrective actions.

It noted that no action had been taken since that order. A notice was issued to the center for a response, with the matter scheduled to continue on May 16.

The hearing also raised a broader concern: the absence of a permanent, independent mechanism to oversee the conduct of CLAT. The court questioned why such a structure had not yet been established.

Previously, on April 30, the Supreme Court had stayed the Delhi High Court’s order that mandated the revision of the results.

Earlier this year, after multiple petitions were filed across various high courts citing similar grievances, the apex court consolidated all cases under the Delhi High Court to ensure consistent adjudication.

The issue first gained traction on December 20, 2024, when a single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court ordered a re-evaluation of the CLAT UG-2025 results.

The division bench later partially upheld this ruling on April 23, acknowledging some objections by candidates while dismissing others.

Meanwhile, the high court is still set to hear challenges regarding the CLAT PG-2025 examination.