SHIVANGI GUPTA Vs. NATIONAL LAW UNIVERISTY JODHPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE.

(2.) WITH the consent of counsel for the parties, the writ petition is set down for final hearing and disposal. The necessary facts to be noticed for disposal of this writ petition are that the petitioner appeared in the Senior Secondary School Examination, 2012 conducted by CBSE and cleared the same. Petitioner, thereafter applied and appeared in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT), 2012. This exam was conducted on 13.05.2012. It may be noticed that the CLAT examination is conducted by the National Law Schools every year on rotation basis in sequence to their establishment and accordingly this years exam was conducted by the respondents, National Law University, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, for 14 National Law Schools/ Universities for admission to the under graduate degree programme; and the successful candidates are to be allotted to all other National Law Schools/ Universities, as per their All India Rank in (CLAT), 2012, for the year 2012. The result of this examination was declared on 28.05.2011. The petitioner has secured 113 marks, while the cut-off declared by the respondent is 123 marks. Since the marks of the petitioner were less than the cut-off declared by the respondent, the petitioner could not qualify for admission in the B.A./BSc./B.B.A./BSW/B.Com. LLB (Hons.) Degree course. The All India Rank of the petitioner is 2719. According to the petitioner, the information brochure which was provided by the respondents along with the application form specified the syllabus for Common Law Admission Test.

(3.) IN the aforesaid writ petition, this Court directed the respondents to upload the question paper and model answer key. Mr.Handoo, counsel for the petitioner submits that the question paper has revealed three types of irregularities which has rendered the whole process perfunctory and have caused great prejudice to the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner has categorized the irregularities in the whole process and has submitted that there are questions which are wrongly answered in the model answer key (hereinafter referred to as ,,category-1); there are questions which relate to the field of legal aptitude, which are incomplete in nature, as the question paper did not supply enough information i.e. principle on the basis of which the question is to be answered (hereinafter referred to as ,,category-2) and questions which are out of syllabus (hereinafter referred to as ,,category-3). In the writ petition the petitioner has given examples of these questions. As per the petitioner, the answer key, has suggested wrong answers to the following questions: i.e. question Nos.56, 86, 186, 193, 197, 200. For the sake of illustration, question no.56 is reproduced below: