CLAT PG | Delhi HC Finds Errors in 2 of 3 Questions; Flags Excessive Fees

The Delhi High Court on Friday accepted objections raised against two of the three questions challenged by candidates who appeared for the Common Law Admission Test Postgraduate 2025 (CLAT PG 2024-25).

While doing so, a division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela also asked the Consortium of NLUs to take steps to prevent “excessive” fees from being charged for filing objections to questions in the next examinations, scheduled for the following years.

The court was dealing with a batch of petitions filed by Anam Khan, Nitika, and Ayush Agrawal seeking rectification of errors in the final answer key of CLAT PG 2024-25. The plea also sought the quashing of the excessive objection fee of Rs 1000 per question.

The petitioners before the court contended that the answer key had multiple wrong answers. While drawing parallels with other exams, it was contended that the fee charged for raising objections was excessive and disproportionate. The petitioners had also pointed out the incorrect answers in the answer key.

On the other hand, it was the Consortium's case that the answer key had been reviewed by Subject Matter Experts and therefore no error existed. The Consortium contended that the fee being charged was reasonable and was imposed to keep frivolous objections at bay.

After taking note of the submissions of all parties, the court at the outset noted that there were eight questions; however, the Consortium had withdrawn four of them. The court then went through all three contested questions, being 21, 57, and 98:

Question 21:

The said question pertained to important factors in determining whether an activity constitutes an industry with respect to the Supreme Court judgment in Bangalore Water Supply v. A. Rajappa and Others. The Consortium had asserted that the correct answer was option B; however, the court held that the correct answer is option C.

Question 57:

This question involved the Mohit Minerals judgment and the reverse charge mechanism under GST.The court upheld the Consortium's stand and held that the correct answer was option A.

Question 98:

The said question pertained to jurisprudence wherein it was asked who said that a "Right is an interest which is to be recognised, protected, and enforced by law". The Consortium had contended that the correct answer was Roscoe Pound. However, the court held that the correct answer is option B (Salmond).

The court accordingly directed the Consortium of NLUs to award marks for the two aforementioned questions in which errors were found.

Objection Regarding Fees

While acknowledging that the fee for raising objections was excessive as compared to national exams, the court noted that since most of the candidates had already paid the fees, quashing the same would create unnecessary complications.

Having observed so, the court said, "In our considered opinion, it may be advisable for the Consortium to place this issue before the committee headed by Justice G. Raghuram (Retd.) for his valuable opinion which may be adhered to by it."

Accordingly, the court disposed of the present petitions.

Case Title: Anam Khan v. Consortium of National Law Universities