A number of cases for CLAT 2025 are set to be heard by the Delhi High Court today April 7, 2025. Total 13 cases were originally scheduled for this hearing, but according to latest information, 2 more have been added, increasing the number of pending cases to 15.
These cases mostly deal with alleged flaws in the CLAT 2025 examination process, such as faults in the undergraduate and graduate CLAT 2025 answer keys, anomalies during the exam, and worries about the high expense of raising objections. In an effort to accelerate the resolution process, these cases have been combined into a single hearing, which recognizes the considerable stress and uncertainty that students feel while they wait for confirmation on their admissions. The Delhi High Court has underlined how critical it is to resolve these issues as soon as possible in order to reduce the stress on impacted candidates.
CLAT 2025 Result Hearing: Answers Challenged
1. Question 14 (Set A):
Challenge: The petitioner argued that the official answer key's correct option was inaccurate.
Court's Decision: The Delhi High Court found merit in this challenge and directed that marks be awarded to candidates who selected Option C for this question.
2. Question 100 (Set A):
Challenge: It was contended that none of the provided options were correct.
Court's Decision: The court acknowledged the error and ordered the exclusion of this question from the evaluation process.
3. Questions 37, 67, and 68 (Set A):
Challenge: The petitioner asserted that these questions contained inaccuracies in the answer key.
Court's Decision: The Delhi High Court declined to intervene regarding these questions, deferring to the expertise of the examination authorities.
CLAT Exam 2025: Merit List Updates
The names and ranks of the candidates shortlisted for the counseling and seat allocation process will be included in the CLAT 2025 merit list, which will be released by the Consortium of NLUs. The Consortium will also release the formal invitation list for counseling participation after a decision is made regarding whether or not the findings should be revised.
