Delhi HC Overrules Consortium on 2 Answers

In a significant ruling in Anam Khan v. Consortium of NLUs affecting CLAT PG 2025 aspirants, the Delhi High Court on Friday (June 6, 2025) upheld objections raised on two out of three disputed questions in the entrance exam held on December 1, 2024.

The Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLUs) to award marks accordingly to candidates who had selected the correct options based on the Court’s reasoning.

Key Points of the Anam Khan v. Consortium of NLUs Judgment

Question on Bangalore Water Supply Case

The Court found that a question claiming to quote a passage from the Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A Rajappa case was not an actual extract, but rather lifted from a commentary or digest.

“It would be unreasonable to expect candidates to infer anything beyond what’s in the given passage,” the Court ruled, identifying Option C as correct.

Question on Jurisprudence

The Court also disagreed with the Consortium’s stance on a jurisprudence question related to the definition of “right.”

It upheld that Salmond, and not Roscoe Pound, had provided the quoted definition. Hence, Option B was held as the correct answer.

₹1,000 Objection Fee Called ‘Excessive’

The petitioners had contested the ₹1,000 per question fee for raising objections. While the Court acknowledged the need to deter frivolous objections, it found the fee disproportionate, especially when compared to other national-level exams.

“A fine balance is required. The Consortium’s concerns are valid, but the fee should not be excessive,” the Court said.

The Bench advised the Consortium to seek guidance from the Justice G. Raghuram Committee and review the policy ahead of future exams.

Background

• Initially, eight questions were challenged by candidates.
• The Consortium withdrew four questions during internal review.
• Another question was withdrawn during the Court proceedings.
• The final ruling addressed the remaining three, of which two objections were upheld.

The ruling is expected to impact CLAT PG 2025 merit rankings and counselling outcomes for LLM admissions across NLUs. The Consortium is now bound to update scores based on the Court’s directions.