Another petition has been filed against CLAT 2018, this time in the Delhi High Court. Akhil Bhartiya Vidhyarthi Parishad (ABVP), which is the students’ wing of the BJP, has approached the Court along with two candidates, Vibhav Chandra and Mangesh Mani.
The High Courts of Rajasthan and Punjab & Haryana are already hearing petitions by various candidates highlighting the technical glitches that marred the conduct of CLAT 2018.
The petition, filed through Advocates Namit Saxena and Nishant Awana (Partner at NMA Law Chambers) in the Delhi High Court, prays for a stay on all further proceedings regarding CLAT 2018 including the declaration of result.
The petition states that,
“The conduct of CLAT over the last several years has been continuously riddled with arbitrariness, opacity, and ineptitude, thereby affecting the education and career prospects of thousands of students, who participate in these exams every year.”
The petition refers to several technical issues faced by the candidates including the fact that the computer screen of the petitioner showed no questions for the first 7 minutes after the commencement of the paper.
Even though the invigilator assured him that loss of time would be fixed during the paper itself, the same was never compensated. Moreover, there was difficulty in switching from one section to another, which also caused loss of time to the petitioner.
The petition further states that,
“More than sixty-thousand candidates took part in the said examination. The candidates faced multiple technical glitches at various test centres including but not limited to disruption in the examination and wrong seating arrangements, unfair time management, and obstruction while entering the centres.”
It is further stated that the examination is not fair, as it consists of various institutional lapses and incompetent online mechanism of conducting the examination.
Even as the High Courts are being approached, a petition filed by professor Shamnad Basheer is pending in the Supreme Court. That PIL argues for handing over the conduct of CLAT to an independent professional body, rather than leaving it to be organised by National Law Schools on a rotation basis.
Appearing in the case, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan had argued in Court last Tuesday that CLAT 2018 was a complete disaster.