Two Questions Accepted, Objection Fee Criticised As “A Month’s Income For Someone”
The court found merit in the challenges to two questions and directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLU Consortium) to revise the answer key accordingly.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on June 6, 2025, gave a judgment on writ petitions filed by CLAT PG 2025 aspirants who had raised objections to three questions in the exam.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela ruled that two out of the three challenged questions must be included in the final evaluation, while one question would remain excluded.
The court found merit in the challenges to two questions and directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLU Consortium) to revise the answer key accordingly. However, the third objection was rejected, as the court held there was no merit in that particular claim.
The NLU Consortium had earlier argued that the petitions were not valid since they were filed after the official window for challenging the answer key had closed. But the High Court rejected this technical argument, making it clear that fairness to students is more important than deadlines.
“We will still entertain the objections,” the court said, stressing that fairness in evaluation should not be denied due to procedural cut-off dates.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Transfers All CLAT UG 2025 Result-Related Cases to Delhi High Court
In a major observation that could impact future exams, the court criticised the Consortium’s fee of Rs.1,000 per objection, calling it too high and unfair to students from poor backgrounds.
The Bench remarked that “such a sum could be a month’s income for someone”, highlighting that the high objection fee may block access to justice for economically weaker students.
The court has also directed the NLU Consortium to reconsider and reduce the fee structure for future exams, making it more affordable and inclusive for all aspirants.
Background
This decision came after petitions were filed by CLAT PG 2025 aspirants, including Anam Khan, Nitika, and Ayush Agrawal. These cases had originally been filed in different High Courts across India but were later transferred to the Delhi High Court by the Supreme Court for a consolidated hearing.
Case Name: Anam Khan v. Consortium of National Law Universities and other connected matters
