CLAT UG 2025 Results to Be Revised! Delhi HC Finds Errors in 4 Questions

The Delhi High Court delivered a significant verdict in a batch of petitions challenging the CLAT 2025 Undergraduate (UG) results. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that four questions in the CLAT UG 2025 examination contained errors. The Court directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to revise the marksheets and publish a renotified list of selected candidates within four weeks.

Key Directions by the Court in Shivraj Sharma v. Consortium of NLUs

The Court undertook a detailed analysis of the objections raised by the petitioners and passed the following directions:

• Question No. 5 (Master Booklet): The official answer key was found to be incorrect. Option (c) was held to be the correct answer. All candidates who selected this option shall be awarded marks.
• Question No. 77 (Master Booklet): The Court held that the question was out of syllabus. It is to be excluded entirely. As a result, students who marked the correct answer will not receive marks, while those who selected incorrect options will not face negative marking and will receive 0.25 marks accordingly.
• Question No. 115 (Master Booklet): Option (a) in the provisional answer key (“Rs.204 approx”) was found to be incorrect. The correct option is (d) – “None of these”. All candidates who attempted this question shall be awarded full marks.
• Question No. 116 (Master Booklet): Due to differences in question paper sets, only candidates who attempted this question in Sets B, C, and D will be awarded the corresponding marks. No relief was granted to Set A candidates since the question was found to be correct in that version.

The Court rejected challenges to several other questions (e.g., Questions 14, 37, 49, 56, 78, 79, 80, 81, 88, 91, 93, and 97), stating that no errors were found upon judicial review.

Summary of the Court’s Order

“In view of the aforesaid detailed analysis and conclusions, we direct the respondent/Consortium to revise the marksheet and to republish/renotify the final list of selected candidates within four weeks from the date of this judgment…”

The Court clarified that this evaluation must be uniformly applied to all candidates affected, not just the petitioners.

Background

The matter stemmed from multiple petitions challenging the final answer key and results of CLAT UG 2025. Initially, a single-judge bench of Justice Jyoti Singh, in December 2024, had identified errors in two questions and directed the Consortium to issue revised results. This order was challenged by both the Consortium and the petitioners, resulting in a transfer of all related cases to the Delhi High Court by the Supreme Court for uniform adjudication.