SC refuses to entertain plea challenging results of CLAT-PG 2025 exams

The petition, filed by Anam Khan and Ayush Agarwal, raised multiple grievances regarding the conduct of the CLAT-PG 2025 examination held on December 1, 2024

Entrance Exams
The petitioners alleged the provisional answer key released on December 2 contained significant errors, including incorrect answers to 12 questions. (File Image)
Press Trust of India New Delhi
2 min read Last Updated : Dec 09 2024 | 7:41 PM IST

The Supreme Court refused to entertain on Monday a plea challenging the results of the CLAT-PG 2025 examination.

A bench of Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar, which was hearing the plea that contested the provisional answer key released for the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) for postgraduate admissions, advised the petitioners to move the Delhi High Court with their grievances.

The bench, while refusing to entertain the plea, underscored the top court cannot act as the court of first instance in such matters and flagged concerns about delays in the release of examination results due to interventions by the apex court.

"We cannot be the court of first instance... We have on enough occasions said this. We have judgments where delays in results due to OMR sheet issues stretched up to eight years. Please go to the high court," the chief justice of India said.

The bench, however, granted the petitioners liberty to approach the high court, stating, "We are not inclined to intervene in the said petition...the petitioner is given liberty to approach the high court."  The petition, filed by Anam Khan and Ayush Agarwal, raised multiple grievances regarding the conduct of the CLAT-PG 2025 examination held on December 1, 2024.

The petitioners alleged the provisional answer key released on December 2 contained significant errors, including incorrect answers to 12 questions.

The plea also objected to the process for raising challenges to the answer key, arguing the one-day window provided for objections, which closed on December 3 at 4 pm, was inadequate.

Further, they opposed the Rs 1,000 fee per objection, calling it exorbitant, particularly when added to the Rs 4,000 examination fee.

The CJI, however, dismissed the objection regarding fees, commenting, "Rs 1,000 per objection is not a big deal. Do you know how much expenditure is incurred?"  The plea also sought a suspension of the counselling process for admissions to postgraduate law programmes at national law universities.

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

Topics :Supreme CourtCLATDelhi High CourtChief Justice of IndiaEntrance Exams

First Published: Dec 09 2024 | 7:41 PM IST

Next Story