Read Time: 04 minutes

Synopsis

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed in the Delhi High Court challenging the mandatory requirement of appearing in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) for individuals seeking selection as officers in the Indian Army's Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch.

The bench, consisting of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna, granted the Central government's counsel time to seek instructions, scheduling the matter for hearing on November 28.

The PIL contends that this mandate is arbitrary, unjustified, unconstitutional, and violates Articles 14, 16, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution of India. It draws attention to the fact that the notification itself acknowledges that CLAT marks will play no role in the selection procedure.

The petitioner, Subham Chopra, through Advocate Prashant Vaxish stated that the notification, JAG 33, issued by the respondent (Union of India) through the Ministry of Defence, brings unreasonable classification and further promotes inequality, rather than providing equal opportunity and promoting equality before the law to all the candidates.

Moreover, the PIL challenges additional criteria, such as the requirement for applicants to be unmarried and the stipulation of not having been arrested in any matter.

The PIL also questions the provision that bars candidates merely on the grounds of a past arrest.

It argued, "It is quite unfortunate and shameful on the part of the respondent that on mere arrest of an individual at the time of the investigation, he has been characterized as a convict despite not being proven guilty for an offence. Furthermore, this not only violates the fundamental protection guaranteed to the citizen(s) under Article 21 of the Constitution of India but also threatens the primary principles of innocence laid down under criminal jurisprudence."

Case Title: Shubham Chopra v. Union of India