IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL … · 20/04/2018 · Writ Petition (Civil) ... The relevant facts leading to filing of the present Writ Petition are as ... High Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. _______ OF 2018

BETWEEN:

Disha Panchal & Ors. ... Petitioners

AND

Union of India & Ors. … Respondents

(FOR INDEX PLEASE SEE INSIDE)

ADVOCATE FOR PETITIONERS: ANAND SHANKAR JHA

Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

I N D E X

Sl.

No.

Particulars of Documents Page No. of part to

which it belongs

Remarks

Part 1

(Contents

of Paper

Book)

Part II

(Contents

of file

alone)

(i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v)

1. Listing Performa A-1 to A-2

2. Cover Page of Paper Book A-3

3. Index of Record of

Proceedings

A-4

4. Limitation Report prepared by

the Registry

A-5

5. Defect List A-

6. Note Sheet NS1 to …..

7. Synopsis, List of Dates &

Events.

B -

8. Writ Petition under Article 32

of the Constitution of India

with affidavits.

9. Annexure-“P-1”

True Copy of Circular No.

NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/201

7 issued by Respondent No. 2

dated 20.12.2017.


True Copy of Instructions for

submission of online

application issued by

Respondent No. 2 dated NIL.



True Copy of Admit Cards of

Petitioner No. 1 to 6 dated

NIL.


True Copy of Article dated

20.04.2018 published by

Express Web Desk of Indian

Express.

13. Annexure- “P-5”


21.04.2018 published by Zee

Media Bureau.



13.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018

conducted today amidst

server crashes, ruckus,

glitches Nationally published

by Online Portal

Youthkiawaaz.



14.05.2018 published by

LegallyIndia Online Portal.



14.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018

Mismanaged, Calls for Retest

Echo Nationally published by

Online Portal Youthkiawaaz.



15.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018


hits with technical glitches and

mismanagement published by

Education Desk of Indian

Express, New Delhi.



15.05.2018 titled Tip of CLAT

2018 Iceberg keeps growing:

At least 1400 Students have

serious complaints as

published by Legally India

Online Portal

19. Annexure “P-11”

True Copy of Representation

dated 15.05.2018 submitted

by Petitioner No. 5




by Petitioner No. 2




by Petitioner No. 6




by Petitioner No. 1




by Petitioner No. 3





by Petitioner No. 4

25. Urgency Affidavit

26. Letter of Urgency + Fresh

Letter

27. Filing Memo

28. Vakalatnama


SYNOPSIS

The present writ Petition is being preferred before this

Hon‟ble Court to highlight various instances of grossly

improper, arbitrary and negligent conduct of Common

Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2018 by Respondent No. 2

and 3, which is a single window entrance mechanism for

admission into nineteen (19) prestigious National Law

Universities across seventeen (17) states of Union of

India. The manner in which such a highly competitive

examination was conducted, has jeopardized the future

of thousands of students who appeared for this

examination held on 13.05.2018. Total apathy shown by

Respondent No. 2 and 3 to a widespread outcry against

technical glitches and mismanagement in CLAT 2018

requires immediate intervention by the Hon‟ble Apex

Court.

Petitioners are students who appeared for CLAT 2018

examination after years of preparation and hard work. At

the outset it must be noted that CLAT 2018 is an

examination that is conducted on an online platform in

designated test centers across the Country. All the

students are mandatorily expected to submit their

responses on a web portal managed and hosted by an

online vendor which is a third party appointed by

Respondent No. 2 and 3. Apart from being a highly


competitive examination wherein about 60,000 students

appeared on 13.05.2018, this examination is held within

a limited time frame of 120 minutes wherein students are

expected to answer 200 questions. These questions are

based in a multiple choice format wherein a student has

to click on the correct answer amongst options A, B, C or

D. These questions appear in a linear manner, which is to

say that the user has to click on the NEXT button on the

screen to move to the next question, and after clicking on

SUBMIT button to register a response. It is also pertinent

to point out that this online platform has an in – built

timer which is set at 120 Minutes. In this way, a student

is awarded marks on the basis of the total number of

questions attempted within the limited time frame.

Impeccable computer systems, server and infrastructural

facilities at the examination center are preconditions for

fair conduct of an examination which is conducted on an All

India basis and which will conclusively decide the fate of

over sixty thousand students, against a total of 2100 seats

in the Undergraduate Program for B.A/ B.Sc/ B.Com/

B.B.A. LLB (Hons) courses . Loss of time by even 5

minutes in such an examination may put the effort of

candidates to a naught. It must also be appreciated that

difference of even 1 mark may result in significant

variation in the rank list. Viewed in light of such


circumstances and prerequisites, the lackadaisical

implementation of CLAT 2018 has severely jeopardized the

future of students who have sacrificed precious years to

get a fair chance for those 2 hours, which was conveniently

taken away from them on account of gross negligence

exhibited by the CLAT Convener. It is under these

circumstances, that the Petitioners have been constrained

to knock at the doors of this Hon‟ble Court. It is

respectfully submitted that the Petitioners and thousands

of other students faced severe hardships that vitiate the

entire examination held by CLAT 2018 Core Committee. An

indicative list of such mis-happenings and problems faced

by the Petitioners is as follows:

(a) Blank Screens whilst attempting the questions, for

almost 10 minutes after commencement of examination.

(b) Regular hanging/disruption of computer systems

provided to the Petitioners.

(c) Electricity cut and Power Failures at several centers

across India.

(d) Problems in bio-metric verification of candidates.

(e) Test timers continuing to run inspite of hanging of

/crashing of computer systems.


(f) Direction given by the invigilators to shift from one

computer system to another while the exam was under

progress, thereby causing irreparable loss to the students.

(g) Infrastructural issues such as extremely old hard

ware and mouse which was not fit to be used for a

competitive examination such as the present one.

(h) Discrepancy in examination time allotted to different

candidates which varied from center to center at the

individual discretion or whims of the invigilators in the

concerned test center.

(i) Non – adherence to the instructions contained in the

Admission Card and non-observance of pre – testing of the

computer systems to obviate any technical glitches during

the conducting of the examination.

(j) Absence of a uniform protocol to deal with the

allotment of time, or extension of time in case of electric

failure, or technical failure of the software, or any other

alternative arrangement to make up for the valuable time

lost.

(k) No specific seats were allotted to the Petitioners and

the Petitioners were made to sit on random computer

systems which were presumed to be working properly as

per the Respondents.


These issues were faced by thousands of students and led

to huge public outcry. Several newspapers, websites and

social media platforms have repeatedly raised concerns

about gross mismanagement of the examination. A

number of articles were carried by Indian Express, Zee

Media, Legally India, Bar and Bench and Youth Ki Aawaz

highlighting the concerns of students across India. In an

interview published by Legally India on 14.05.2018,

Respondent No. 3 reportedly gave a statement as follows:

“We are looking into each and every report. At 1.5%

(of the total) centers computers failed and

immediately (the candidates) were given the time. I

manually look into the computer login report.”

This statement amounts to a clear admission that CLAT

2018 was marred by severe technical problems. Even if it

is assumed that problem was faced by only 1.5% of the

total students it would mean that about 850 students were

clearly denied an opportunity to participate in CLAT 2018

in a fair, effective and transparent manner. This itself is a

sufficient ground to quash the entire examination.

However as is evident, the erros and omissions were

deliberate and negligent, and a clear attempt is made by

Respondent No. 3 to underplay the magnitude of problems

that have been caused in conducting the examinations. In

the aftermath of the examinations, various Writ Petitions


came to be preferred across various High Courts by

individual students bringing into light all the maladies that

have occasioned on account of the negligence of the

invigilators, poor conditions of the test centers, apathetic

attitude of the Convener CLAT 2018, as well as serious

problems with the softwares and the online platform relied

on to conduct the examination which clearly demonstrates

that the problem is extremely severe and requires

immediate judicial intervention so as to save precious

futures.

In further blatant disregard of aspirations of the

Petitioners, the Respondent No. 2 and 3 have failed to

even acknowledge the representations submitted by them.

It is indeed regrettable to note that even now neither an

expert committee has been appointed nor any statement

has been issued disclosing the steps taken by the

Respondent No. 2 and 3 to protect the interest of the

Petitioners and hundreds of similarly situated students.

Respondent 2 and 3 cannot be permitted to take

advantage of their own wrong and the shield of limited

time schedule for the examination. This deliberate

executive inaction by Respondent No. 2 and 3 hits at the

very basis of the principles of accountability, fair play,

transparency and is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the

Constitution.


The present Petition is filed in the interests of justice. A

number of Writ Petitions have already been filed by

students in several High Courts in respect of similar

grievances.

This writ petition has been preferred to bring to the notice

of this Hon‟ble Court a systematic, procedural negligence

carried out at an institutional level, which has effaced any

semblance of transparency or accountability to be

observed while conducting an all India entrance

examination.

The instant Writ Petition attempts to bring out the

arbitrary, opaque, unreasonable and hopeless

implementation of CLAT conducted by the respondents

herein.

Although the popularity amassed by CLAT is on a steady

rise, the planning and implementation of conducting the All

India Examination is marred with serious flaws from the

choice of technical partner to an abrupt and sudden

change in the software platform within weeks before the

conduct of examination without actually giving in a

reasonable amount of time to the candidates to get used

to the software. The delay in the online application form

due to technical errors further suggests that the software

wasn‟t free from errors.


Therefore, owing to all the technical glitches, inefficient

management, and the incompetent conduction of a

national level entrance examinations, the Petitioner seeks

the immediate intervention of this Hon‟ble Court to address

the grievances of thousands of candidates whose rights

under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India have

been blatantly violated. Hence, the present petition.


LIST OF DATES AND EVENTS

2014 - 2017 Petitioners are students aspiring to join

prestigious National Law Schools set up in

various states of India. In year 2007, the Vice

Chancellors of seven National Law Universities

namely, National Law School of India

University (NLSIU) Bangalore, NALSAR

University of Law (NALSAR) Hyderabad,

National Law Institute University (NLIU)

Bhopal, West Bengal National University of

Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata, National

Law University (NLU) Jodhpur, Hidayatullah

National Law University (HNLU) Raipur and

Gujarat National Law University (GNLU)

Gandhinagar entered into a Memorandum of

Understanding for establishment of a Common

Law Admission Test (“CLAT”).

Further in year 2014 another Memorandum of

Understanding was executed by then existing

sixteen (16) National Law Universities

whereby the above mentioned seven (7)

National Law Universities along with Dr. Ram

Manohar Lohia National Law University

(RMNLU) Lucknow, Rajiv Gandhi National

University of Law (RGNUL) Patiala, Chanakya


National Law University (CNLU) Patna,

National University of Advanced Legal Studies

(NUALS) Kochi, National Law University Odisha

(NLUO) Cuttack, National University of Study

and Research in Law (NUSRL) Ranchi, National

Law University Assam (NLUJAA) Guwahati,

Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law

University (DSNLU) Vishakhapatnam and

Tamil Nadu National Law School (TNNLS)

Tiruchirapalli entered into a fresh

Memorandum of Understanding for conducting

Common Law Admission Test.

Further, three (3) more National Law

Universities namely Maharashtra National Law

University (MNLU- Mumbai) Mumbai,

Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU-

Aurangabad) Aurangabad and National Law

University (NLU-Nagpur) Nagpur have also

joined in and are participating in conduct of

Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”).

20.12.2017 As per the terms of Memorandum of

Understanding between National Law

Universities, Common Law Admission Test

(“CLAT”) is conducted by rotation depending

on the year of establishment of the respective


National Law Universities. Accordingly, the

first Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”)

was conducted in year 2008 National Law

School of India University (NLSIU) Bangalore.

On 20.12.2017, National University of

Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi issued

a circular bearing circular number NUALS/

CLAT 2018/951/03/2017 inviting applications

for admissions to the Under Graduate and Post

Graduate Degree programmes in Law in the

Nineteen (19) National Law Universities in

India. As per this circular, the basic

educational qualification was set out for Under

Graduate programme and Post Graduate

programme. The date for commencement of

submission of Online Application was

01.01.2018 and the last date for submission

was fixed for 31.03.2018. The date for holding

Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018

was 13.05.2018.

All the students were instructed to visit the

official website of CLAT 2018 (www.clat.ac.in)

for detailed instructions including Syllabus,

Eligibility, Exam Pattern and list of important

dates and instructions.


22.09.2017 The National University of Advanced Legal

Studies (NUALS), Kochi, the Respondent

herein which on the basis of rotation were to

conduct CLAT 2018, announced the

examination date on its official website.

01.01.2018 The online CLAT portal started to accept

applications of students for the Under

Graduate and Post Graduate courses of Law.

All the aspirants were mandatorily required to

submit online application and all the necessary

instructions and notifications were conveyed

through the online portal itself. The procedure

for filling up the application form was set out

on the online CLAT portal.

The National University of Advanced Legal

Studies (NUALS) Kochi was the designated

University for conducting Common Law

Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018. Hon‟ble Vice-

Chancellor of NUALS Kochi was appointed as

the Convener of CLAT 2018 Core Committee

being the Vice-Chancellor of the conducting

University. Hon‟ble Vice-Chancellor(s) of all

Nineteen (19) participating Universities were

members in the CLAT 2018 Core Committee.


Another Committee, namely the CLAT 2018

Implementation Committee was setup for

smooth implementation of CLAT 2018

comprising of Registrar(s) of all Nineteen (19)

National Law Universities.

31.03.2018 As on the last date for submission of online

application i.e., 31.03.2018 approximately

60,000 students from all parts of India

submitted their duly filled in application forms

and deposited requisite fees to appear for

CLAT 2018. Petitioners had also submitted

their application forms and made the

necessary fee deposit. It is pertinent to

mention that the cost of the Application Form

was about Rs. 4,000 per candidate. This

amount when tallied against the total strength

of the students would roughly come down to

Rs. 24 Crores. This clearly demonstrates that

for the 2018 Edition of CLAT, NUALS Kochi had

sufficient funds to conduct the All India

Entrance Examination in a fair and transparent

manner.

20.04.2018 As per the instruction made available on the

online portal of CLAT 2018, students were

instructed to download their Admit Cards/Hall


Tickets starting from 20.04.2018. However,

the petitioners noticed that Respondent No. 2

and 3 had uploaded a Disclaimer on the

website stating as follows:

“Owing to some technical reasons, the

downloading of Admit Card will

commence only from April 26, 2018.”

Note: It is relevant to mention that CLAT

2018 was expected to be a completely online

examination. All the instructions prior to the

exam were also to be issued through the

online portal itself. That right from the very

beginning there were several technical mis-

happenings which ultimately resulted in

extremely poor, unfair and arbitrary conduct

of CLAT 2018.

26.04.2018 Petitioners and all the other students were

able to download their Admit Cards from the

website of CLAT 2018 and the said Admit Card

came with a particular set of instructions for

online examination.

It is relevant to mention that the entire

interface for CLAT 2018 Examination was

modified by Respondent No. 2 and 3. There


was a remarkable shift from the online

interface followed from 2015 i.e., the year

when CLAT was first conducted as an online

examination. To the surprise of the

Petitioners, a new testing interface was

presented inter alia with section tags and de-

tags that caused serious problem to all the

students appearing for the examination

including the Petitioners herein. That the

instructions issued along with the admit cards

was the first instance of communication of

such sweeping changes made by Respondent

No. 2 and 3 for online CLAT examination 2018.

13.05.2018 Petitioners appeared for CLAT 2018

examination at their respective centers. About

58,000 students appeared for the CLAT 2018

examination in a total of 260 examination

centers set up across India. This examination

was conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3

with the aid and assistance of a private

company namely M/s Sify Technologies Ltd.

That the students across various states of

India faced serious problems in almost 200

online examination centers. The problems

included power cuts, failure of log-in system,


slow biometric verification, blank screens,

substantial loss of time in system log-ins,

dysfunctional tabs, particularly the ones which

enabled a student to “SUBMIT” his/her

response or to move to the “NEXT” question

after the response was submitted, overhaul of

software interface, lack of adequate number of

additional computers for emergency purposes,

functioning of the timer, unprofessional and

negligent response of the invigilators.

Primarily these difficulties led to significant

loss of time (averaging about 5-30 minutes

from student to student) which has totally

vitiated the very essence an online

competitive exam of 120 minutes wherein a

student is expected to answer 200 questions.

Roughly, a little over 1 Minute per question is

the optimum speed required to be maintained

in an examination of such nature. To lose 30

minutes would result in ouster from the

competition itself, considering as many as

over 100 students could lie on the same rank,

which may differ by One Mark. In such a

highly competitive and rigorous examination,

loss of time essentially means fait accompli for

the aspirations of any student. It is relevant to


mention that the ranking of a student can slip

by thousand or more ranks by a simple

difference of one or two incorrect answers/

un-attempted questions. In such

circumstances when the severe technical

lapses are viewed, it essentially means gross

violation of fundamental rights of students

under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of

India.

In addition to these gross technical problems,

students faced several other issues such as

extremely poor infrastructure of examination

centers, lack of proper guidance from staff

recruited by the examination centers and

several instances of unfair conduct of

examination. For instance, at an examination

center at Hissar, Haryana, few students were

seen attempting the examination till 7:00 PM

whereas the exam was expected to conclude

at 5:00 PM itself. Whereas in other centers

across the Country, there have been instances

when on account of the technical problems

being faced by a student, an initial promise

was made by the invigilator to grant extended

time, but the same was abruptly truncated by


the invigilator, thereby granting only an hour

and a half to complete the entrance

examination. In some serious cases, the

invigilators and test center coordinators

resorted to coercion to shut down the test

without giving any extra time or opportunity

on account of the time lost by a student. In

essence, it is submitted that Petitioners and

thousands of other similarly situated students

were compelled to take the examination under

grossly unfair conditions that has all the

makings of seriously jeopardizing their result.

The final outcome or rank list prepared out of

such an examination is bound to be erroneous

and grossly unjust.

14.05.2018 An interview of Vice-Chancellor of NUALS

Kochi was published by website namely

(www.legallyindia.com) wherein it was

reported that 98.5% of CLAT 2018 went

smoothly and that there have been reports

regarding the computes crashing at some of

the centers. Assuming the figures to be

correct, it can be safely concluded that about

thousand (1000) students admittedly faced

technical difficulties which is a sufficient


ground for cancellation of entire CLAT 2018

examination. It has to be noted that CLAT

2018 is a competitive examination wherein

ranking of students significantly varies even in

a gap of 1 or 2 marks. In such circumstances,

if about thousand (1000) students were not

given fair opportunity for attempting the

examination, it would lead to entire rank list

being unfair and unjust.

14.05.2018 Gross technical errors and unfair conditions of

examination lead to widespread public outcry.

Several newspapers, websites, blogging

portals reported of remarkably poor conduct of

CLAT 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3. This

includes articles published in Indian Express,

Youth Ki Awaaz, Legally India, Lawoctopus,

Bar and Bench, Zee Media etc.

Petitioners are constrained to prefer this Writ

Petition in Public Interest setting out their

grievances and instances of violation of their

fundamental rights. Additionally, it is also

stated that students from more than 20 states

are gravely prejudiced by unfair, unjust and

mismanaged conduct of CLAT 2018 by


Respondent No. 2 and 3. In view of the time

constraints under which the Petitioners are

operating, the present Petition is filed by 6

students from two (3) different states i.e.,

Delhi, Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh.

However, more than 500 similarly situated

students are likely to join the present Petition

in immediate future.

15.05.2018 That a number of online platforms including

Twitter and Facebook carried hundreds of

discussions about mismanagement and

technical glitches that vitiated the entire CLAT

2018 examination. A Google Form

Questionnaire was uploaded on the internet

seeking response of genuine exam takes and

students who appeared for CLAT 2018. It is

appalling to mention that within a of the

Google Form/Questionnaire going online, more

than one thousand (1000) have reported

issues about technical glitches, infrastructural

short comings and illegalities committed in

conduct of CLAT 2018.

15.05.2018 A Civil Writ Petition, being CWP no.

12792/2018, titled Pranjal Goel v. Union of

India & Others before Hon‟ble High Court of


Punjab & Haryana was filed by a Haryana-

based CLAT aspirant, Pranjal Goel, under

Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India,

alleging that he lost approximately 30 minutes

during his test owing to technical glitches.

16.05.2018 Out of the seven students who filed a police

complaint in Jaipur, two of them, Akshay Jain

and Mansi Jain, filed a Writ Petition, being

CWP no. 10818/2018 titled Akshay Jain &

Another v. NUALS & Others. The petitioners

prayed for: (i) an appropriate writ, order or

direction, directing the Respondents to re-

conduct the CLAT - 2018 examination or

provide to the Petitioners with such extra

marks, and (ii) passing of any other writ,

order or directions to which the Petitioners

may be entitled to in the circumstances of the

case be issued in their favour. The Hon‟ble

High Court was pleased to issue notice in the

matter.

19.05.2018 Hence, the present Petition.


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. ______ OF 2018

IN THE MATTER OF:

1. Disha Panchal

D/o Shri Satish Panchal

House No. 13408, Ram Nagar Extension

Street No. 5, Mandoli Road

Shahdara, Delhi – 110032

Contesting

Petitioner No. 1

2. Tapan Gaur

S/o Shyam Sunder Sharma

57, Second Floor, Sharda Niketan

Pitampura, New Delhi – 110034

Contesting

Petitioner No. 2

3. Vritant Garg

S/o Ruchir Garg

L-25,Behind RKC, Krishna Nagar,

Danganiya, Raipur – 492001

Contesting

Petitioner No. 3

4. Animesh Shukla

S/o Vijay Kumar Shukla

Ramkrishan Villa, Ward 69, Behind Parshv

Vihar, Gol Chowk, Rohinipuram,

Raipur – 492001

Contesting

Petitioner No. 4

5. Shivam Shandilya

S/o Sarvendra Krishna Tripathi

1485, Block No. C, Indira Nagar

Lucknow (UP) – 226016

Contesting

Petitioner No. 5

6. Sanya Sethi

D/o Ajay Sethi

13 N 52, Govind Nagar

Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) – 208006

Contesting

Petitioner No. 6


Versus

1. Union of India

Through the Secretary

Ministry of Human Resource Development

Shastri Bhawan

Dr Rajendra Prasad Road

New Delhi - 110001

Contesting

Respondent No. 1

2. The National University of Advanced Legal

Studies (NUALS) Kochi

“CLAT 2018 – Organizing University”

Through its Registrar

NUALS Campus, HMT Colony

P.O. Kalamassery, Kochi

Kerala – 683503

Contesting

Respondent No. 2

3. Core Committee – Common Law

Admission Test 2018

Through its Convener

Vice-Chancellor, National University of

Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi

NUALS Campus, HMT Colony

P.O. Kalamassery, Kochi

Kerala – 683503.

Contesting

Respondent No. 3

To,

Hon‟ble The Chief Justice of India and

His Hon‟ble Companion Justices of the

Hon‟ble Supreme Court of India

The Humble Petition of the

Petitioners Abovenamed:


MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

(1) The Petitioners are constrained to approach this Hon‟ble

court and invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction under

Article 32 of Constitution of India seeking urgent

intervention of this Hon‟ble Court against grossly unfair,

negligent and mismanaged conduct of Common Law

Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 by Respondent No. 2 and 3

herein. It is most respectfully submitted that the instant

petition that has been preferred under Article 32 of the

Constitution for the violation of the rights of the

Petitioners guaranteed under the Article 14 and 21 of the

Constitution of India. The acts and omissions of the

Respondent No. 2 and 3 have violated fundamental rights

of the Petitioners as well as several other similarly placed

students who have also appeared for Common Law

Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 for admissions to Under

Graduate and Post Graduate courses offered by National

Law Universities across India.

(1A) That the Petitioners are approaching this Hon‟ble Court

under Article 32 of Constitution of India since conduct of

Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018 by

Respondent No. 2 and 3 was evidently improper, unfair

and unjust which has caused grave prejudice to the

Petitioners and other similarly placed students based


across various states of India. Due to paucity of time and

stringent examination schedule, this Petition at present is

being filed by six Petitioners (6) Petitioners/ Students

(two (2) from Delhi and two (2) from Chhattisgarh and

two (2) from Uttar Pradesh). However, students from

more than fifteen (15) states are likely to join the present

Petition in near future. Further, the present Petition is

expected to have widest ramification since participating

National Law Universities in seventeen (17) different

states are integral part of Common Law Admission Test

2018 Core Committee represented through their

respective Vice-Chancellor(s). The relief sough against

the Respondent No. 2 and 3 cannot be granted by

individual Hon‟ble High Courts. Thus, the present Petition

is being filed before this Hon‟ble Court.

(2) That the present Petition is filed for seeking limited reliefs in

relation to conduct of CLAT 2018 examination, wherein

egregious lapses on the part of Respondent No. 2 and 3

in conduct of the examination has jeopardized aspirations

of thousands of future Law students who seek admission

into the prestigious National Law Universities across

India. In short, the problems related to conduct of online

examination (issues including hanging of computer

systems, numerous power cuts, difficulty in login, blank

screens, errors in biometric verification, non adherence to

mandatory conducting of a pre – test to avoid any


technical glitches, amongst other issues) which was faced

by thousands of students has vitiated the entire

examination. Respondents are well aware of the large

scale public outcry by students and their parents.

However, none of the emails/ letters/ representations/

submitted have been looked into much less addressed by

Respondent No. 2 and 3. Thus, in the interest of justice it

is essential that CLAT 2018 should be reconducted failing

which the entire result of CLAT 2018 examination is

bound to be erroneous and grossly unjust.

(3) It is respectfully submitted that the present Petition stands

on a different footing and is in no manner related to the

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 600 of 2015 titled Shamnad

Basheer Versus Union of India, wherein different set of

relief have been sought before this Hon‟ble Court.

Further, the present Writ petition is urgent in nature and

deserves immediate intervention since the result of CLAT

2018 examination is likely to be published by May 31,

2018.

(4) The Petitioners herein are citizens of India. Petitioners are

aspiring law students and thus had appeared in CLAT

2018 which was conducted on 13.05.2018. A snap shot of

name, parent age, roll number, examination center,


problems faced and steps taken by the Petitioners are as

follows:

S.

No

Name,

Father’s Name,

Roll Number

and Centre of

Examination of

the Student

Representation made before

the concerned authorities

pertaining to the grievances

as mentioned

1.

Disha Panchal

D/o Shri Satish

Panchal

Roll No: 10004685,

Examination

Center: RR

Assessment Center,

Z36, 2nd Floor,

Okhla Industrial

Area, Phase 2, Near

Harkesh Nagar,

Okhla Metro

Station, New Delhi -

110020

Email to the Vice- Chancellor, the

Registrar and the Admission

Incharge of NUALS, Kochi dated

16/05/2018, mentioning the

grievances as under:

i. Initially at 3:00 PM,

questions were not

displayed on the test screen

ii. Questions kept disappearing

from the main screen

because of technical

problems in the software

interface.

iii. Moving from one question to

another was very

cumbersome and took a lot

of time on account of

dysfunctionality in the NEXT

button/tab.

iv. The invigilators were

unhelpful, asked to shut the

computers, restart and login

again thereby wasting

invaluable time of the

students.

v. Finally, the computer could

only start at 3: 35 PM when

the time remaining was only

1 hour and 25 minutes


vi. At 5:00 PM, paper was

submitted.

vii. Petitioner requested the

invigilator for 35 minutes

extra which the petitioner

lost initially on account of

technical glitches in the

system, and for no fault of

his own.

viii. Invigilator asked the

petitioner to wait at the

examination hall.

ix. At around 7:00 PM, i.e.,

after two hours of

submission, petitioner was

allotted 10 minutes, in

which the petitioner faced

the same technical

problems.

2.

Tapan Gaur

S/o Shyam Sunder

Sharma

Roll No. 10000943

Examination Center:

Apex Online Solution,

Lal Kothi, Chauhan

Complex, Sanjay

Colony, Sohana

Road, Lal Kothi,

Faridabad, Haryana

121005

Email to the Vice- Chancellor and

the Registrar of NUALS, Kochi

dated 16/05/2018, mentioning

the grievances as under:

i. The mouse was

malfunctioning, the

Petitioner had to click it at

least twice or thrice to reach

to the next question.

ii. Thumb prints and

signatures were not taken

before the formalities were

to be observed, but was in

fact taken during the

allotted 120 minutes‟ time

limit which resulted in

precious waste of time.


iii. A lot of students' exam

commenced before others

(due to there being no

official announcement of the

start of the exam) and

hence a lot of students saw

the questions from other

screens and solved them

before they started their

own exam.

iv. Exam didn't start on time.

There was no uniformity of

the commencement or

conclusion of the

examination within a

particular center.

v. Screens were crashing a lot

of times while the timer was

still running, thereby

causing serious loss of time

to the Petitioner who had to

log in every time the screen

crashed, restarting the

system all over again,

logging in as going back to

the question which was

being attempted. Every

single “fresh log in attempt”

conveniently caused a loss

of over 10 minutes on an

average.

3.

Vritant Garg

S/o Ruchir Garg

Roll No. 10017390

Examination Center;

Rungta Engineering

College, Ward No. 1,

Veer Sawarkar Nagar,

Email to the Registrar of NUALS,

Kochi dated 17/05/2018,

mentioning the grievances as

under:


questions were not




Behind Nandan Van,

Raipur, Chhattisgarh-

492009

from Screen.

iii. Invigilators were unhelpful,

asked to shut the


again.

iv. Finally, computer started at

3:10 PM when only 1 hour

and 50 minutes was

remaining for the petitioner.

v. No extra time was allotted

against the loss of 10

minutes.

vi. After the exam, petitioner

signed the application which

mentions about the delay

and technical lacunas.

4.

Animesh Shukla

S/o Vijay Kumar

Shukla

Roll No. 10022585

Examination

Center: Rungta

Engineering College,

Ward No. 1, Veer

Sawarkar Nagar,

Behind Nandan Van,

Raipur,

Chhattisgarh-

492009

Email to the Vice- Chancellor, the

Registrar and the Admission

Incharge of NUALS, Kochi dated

17/05/2018, mentioning the

grievances as under:


questions were not



because of technical

problems.

iii. The invigilators were

unhelpful, asked to shut the


again.

iv. Finally, computer was

started at 3: 11 PM when

only 1 hour and 49 minutes


was remaining for the

petitioner.

v. No extra time was allotted

against the loss of 11

minutes.

5. Shivam Shandilya

S/o Sarvendra

Krishna Tripathi

Roll No.10037193

Examination Center:

R R Institute of

Modern technology,

NH-24, Bahisamau

Crossing, Bakshi Ka

Talab, Sitapur road,

Near Bhaisamau

Crossing, Lucknow,

Uttar Pradesh -

226201

Email to the Registrar, NUALS,



under:

i. Partiality in tile allotment.

ii. Technical glitches.

iii. Provided only 1 hour and 30

minutes to attempt the

examination.

iv. Had to shift the computer

for 4 times.

v. Problem in bio-metric

verification.

6. Sanya Sethi

D/o Ajay Sethi

Roll No. 10017671

Examination Center:

Unzip Technologies

LLP, L/PR-9,

Keshavpuram

Kalyanpur,

Vijaynagar-

Kalyanpur Road,

Near Katyayan

School, Kanpur, Uttar

Email to the Registrar, NUALS,



under:

i. Technical Glitches.

ii. Infrastructural lacunas.

iii. Center incharge was least

co-operative.

iv. Questions were not

displayed for initial 5-10

minutes.


Pradesh- 208001. v. Problem of blank screen was

faced many times during

the examination.

(5) The Respondents herein are „State‟ under Article 12 of

Constitution of India and public authority against whom a

Writ Petition can be maintained under Article 32 of the

Constitution of India. Respondent No. 1 is the Secretary,

Ministry of Human Resource Development, Union of

India. Respondent No. 2 is the Registrar of National

University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS), Kochi. The

said University namely NUALS, Kochi is the organizing

University which was responsible for conducting CLAT

2018 examination. Respondent No. 3 is the CLAT 2018

Core Committee represented by its Convener i.e., Vice-

Chancellor of NUALS, Kochi. Therefore, the actions of the

Respondents constitute a serious violation of the

sacrosanct rights guaranteed under the Constitution of

India to various prospective law students, including the

right to guard against arbitrary actions of the state

cherished and protected under Article 14 of the

Constitution of India and the right to education and other

connected rights within the meaning of Article 21 of the

Constitution of India.


(6) It is relevant to mention that the CLAT 2018 Core

Committee comprised of sitting Vice-Chancellor(s) of 19

different National Law Universities. These 19 National

Law Universities and 35 private Colleges/ Universities

draw upon the results published by Respondent No. 2 and

3 for admitting students to the Under Graduate and Post

Graduate courses in the discipline of Law. Further, some

public sector undertakings short list candidates for

interview rounds based on the Post Graduate results of


A. Relevant facts

(6) The relevant facts leading to filing of the present Writ

Petition are as follows:

6.1 Petitioners are students aspiring to join prestigious

National Law Schools set up in various states of India.

6.2 In year 2007, the Vice Chancellors of seven National Law

Universities namely, National Law School of India

University (NLSIU) Bangalore, NALSAR University of Law

(NALSAR) Hyderabad, National Law Institute University

(NLIU) Bhopal, West Bengal National University of

Juridical Sciences (NUJS), Kolkata, National Law

University (NLU) Jodhpur, Hidayatullah National Law

University (HNLU) Raipur and Gujarat National Law

University (GNLU) Gandhinagar entered into a


Memorandum of Understanding for establishment of a

Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”).

6.3 In year 2014, another Memorandum of Understanding

was executed by then existing Sixteen (16) National Law

Universities whereby the above mentioned Seven (7)

National Law Universities along with Dr. Ram Manohar

Lohia National Law University (RMNLU) Lucknow, Rajiv

Gandhi National University of Law (RGNUL) Patiala,

Chanakya National Law University (CNLU) Patna, National

University of Advanced Legal Studies (NUALS) Kochi,

National Law University Odisha (NLUO) Cuttak, National

University of Study and Research in Law (NUSRL) Ranchi,

National Law University Assam (NLUJAA) Guwahati,

Damodaram Sanjivayya National Law University (DSNLU)

Vishakhapatnam and Tamil Nadu National Law School

(TNNLS) Tiruchirapalli, entered into a fresh Memorandum

of Understanding for conducting Common Law Admission

Test.

6.4 That, three (3) more National Law Universities namely

Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU- Mumbai)

Mumbai, Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU-

Aurangabad) Aurangabad and National Law University

(NLU-Nagpur) Nagpur have also joined in and are

participating in conduct of Common Law Admission Test

(“CLAT”).


6.5 That, as per the terms of Memorandum of Understanding

between National Law Universities, Common Law

Admission Test (“CLAT”) is conducted by rotation

depending on the year of establishment of the respective

National Law University. Accordingly, the first Common

Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) was conducted in year 2008

by National Law School of India University (NLSIU)

Bangalore.

6.6 On 20.12.2017, National University of Advanced Legal

Studies (NUALS) Kochi issued a circular bearing circular

number NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/2017 inviting

applications for admissions to the Under Graduate and

Post Graduate Degree programmes in Law in the

Nineteen (19) National Law Universities in India. True

Copy of Circular No. NUALS/CLAT2018/951/03/2017

dated 20.12.2017 issued by Respondent No. 2 is annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure “P-1” (Page Nos ___

to ___)

6.7 As per this circular, the basic educational qualification

was set out for Under Graduate programme and Post

Graduate programme. The date for commencement of

submission of Online Application was 01.01.2018 and the

last date for submission was fixed for 31.03.2018. The


date for holding Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”)

2018 was 13.05.2018.

6.8 That all the students were instructed to visit the official

website of CLAT 2018 (www.clat.ac.in) for detailed

instructions including Syllabus, Eligibility, Exam Pattern

and list of important dates and instructions. True Copy of

Instructions for submission of online application issued by

Respondent No. 2 dated NIL are annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure “P-2” (Page Nos ___ to ___)

6.9 On 01.01.2018, online CLAT portal started to accept

applications of students for the Under Graduate and Post

Graduate courses of Law. All the aspirants were

mandatorily required to submit online application and all

the necessary instructions and notifications were

conveyed through the online portal itself. The procedure

for filling up the application form was set out on the

Online CLAT portal.

6.10 The National University of Advanced Legal Studies

(NUALS) Kochi was the designated University for

conducting Common Law Admission Test (“CLAT”) 2018.

Hon‟ble Vice-Chancellor of NUALS Kochi was designated

as the Convener of “CLAT 2018 Core Committee” being

the Vice-Chancellor of the conducting University. Hon‟ble

Vice-Chancellor(s) of all Nineteen (19) participating


National Law Universities were members in the “CLAT

2018 Core Committee”.

6.11 That another Committee, namely the “CLAT 2018

Implementation Committee” was setup for smooth

implementation of CLAT 2018 comprising of Registrar(s)

of all Nineteen (19) National Law Universities.

6.12 That on the last date for submission of online application

i.e., 31.03.2018 approximately 60,000 students from all

parts of India submitted their duly filled in application

forms and deposited requisite fees to appear for CLAT

2018. Petitioners had also submitted their application

forms and made the necessary fee deposit.

6.13 That on 20.04.2018, as per the instructions made

available on the Online portal of CLAT 2018, students

were instructed to download their Admit Cards/ Hall

Tickets starting from 20.04.2018. However, the

petitioners noticed that Respondent No. 2 and 3 had

uploaded a Disclaimer on the website stating as follows:

“Owing to some technical reasons, the downloading

of Admit Card will commence only from April 26,

2018.


Note: It is relevant to mention that CLAT 2018 was

expected to be a completely online examination. All the

instructions prior to the exam were also to be issued

through the online portal itself. That right from the very

beginning there were several technical mis-happenings

which ultimately resulted in extremely poor, unfair and

arbitrary conduct of CLAT 2018.

6.14 That on 26.04.2018, Petitioners and all the other

students were able to download their Admit Cards from

the website of CLAT 2018 and the said Admit Card came

with a particular set of instructions for online

examination. It is relevant to mention that the entire

interface for CLAT 2018 Examination was modified by

Respondent No. 2 and 3. There was a remarkable shift

from the online interface followed from 2015 i.e., the

year when CLAT was first conducted as an online

examination. To the surprise of the Petitioners, a new

testing interface was presented inter alia with section

tags and de-tags that caused serious problem to all the

students appearing for the examination including the

Petitioners herein. That the instructions issued along with

the admit cards was the first instance of communication

of such sweeping changes made by Respondent No. 2

and 3 for online CLAT examination 2018.


True Copy of Admit Cards of Petitioner No. 1 to 6 dated

NIL are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-

3” (Page Nos ___ to ___).

6.15 That Zee Media Bureau and Indian Express carried articles

on their web portal highlighting the issue of delay in

release of CLAT 2018 Admit Cards.

True Copy of Article dated 20.04.2018 published by

Express Web Desk of Indian Express is annexed herewith

and marked as Annexure “P-4” (Page Nos ___ to ___).

True Copy of Article dated 21.04.2018 published by Zee

Media Bureau is annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure “P-5” (Page Nos ___ to ___).

6.16 That on 13.05.2018, Petitioners appeared for CLAT 2018

examination at their respective centers. About 58,000

students appeared for the CLAT 2018 examination in a

total of 260 examination centers set up across India. This

examination was conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3

with the aid and assistance of a private company namely

M/s Sify Technologies Ltd. That the terms of understanding

between the Respondent No. 2 and M/s Sify Technologies

Ltd were never disclosed to the public at large and the

Petitioners herein.


6.17 That the students across various States of India faced

serious problems in almost 200 Online Examination

Centers. The problems included power cuts, failure of log-

in system, slow biometric verification, blank screens,

substantial loss of time in system log-ins, frequent

resetting of computer systems and difficulties in moving

from one question to another.

6.18 That primarily these difficulties led to significant loss of

time (averaging about 5-30 minutes from student to

student) which has totally vitiated the very essence of an

online competitive exam of 120 minutes wherein a student

is expected to answer 200 questions. In such a highly

competitive and rigorous examination, loss of time

essentially means fait accompli for the aspirations of any

student. It is relevant to mention that the ranking of a

student can slip by thousand or more ranks by a simple

difference of one or two incorrect answers/ un-attempted

questions. In such circumstances when the severe

technical lapses are viewed, it essentially means gross

violation of fundamental rights of students under Article 14

and 21 of the Constitution of India.

6.19 That in addition to these gross technical problems,

students faced several other issues such as extremely poor


infrastructure of examination centers, lack of proper

guidance from staff recruited by the examination centers

and several instances of unfair conduct of examination. For

instance, at an examination center as Hissar, Haryana few

students were seen attempting the examination till 7:00

PM whereas the exam was expected to conclude at 5:00

PM itself. In essence, it is submitted that Petitioners and

thousands of other similarly situated students were

compelled to take the examination under grossly unfair

condition seriously jeopardizing their result. The final

outcome or rank list prepared out of such an examination

is bound to be erroneous and grossly unjust.

6.20 That the magnitude of mismanagement and gross

irregularity in conduct of examination can also be

deciphered from the several other article published by

websites such as www.youthkiawaaz.com,

www.barandbench.com, www.lawoctopus.com.

True Copy of Article dated 13.05.2018 titled CLAT 2018

conducted today amidst server crashes, ruckus, glitches

Nationally published by Online Portal Youthkiawaaz is

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-6” (Page

Nos ___ to ___).

6.21 On 14.05.2018, an interview of Vice-Chancellor of NUALS

Kochi was published by website namely (www.


http://www.youthkiawaaz.com/

http://www.lawoctopus.com/

legallyindia.com) wherein it was reported that 98.5% of

CLAT 2018 went smoothly and that there have been

reports regarding the computes crashing at some of the

centers. Assuming the figures to be correct, it can be

safely concluded that about thousand (1000) students

admittedly faced technical difficulties which is a sufficient

ground for cancellation of entire CLAT 2018 examination. It

has to be noted that CLAT 2018 is a competitive

examination wherein ranking of students significantly

varies even in a gap of 1 or 2 marks. In such

circumstances, if about thousand (1000) students were not

given fair opportunity for attempting the examination, it

would lead to entire rank list being unfair and unjust.

True Copy of Article dated 14.05.2018 published by

LegallyIndia Online Portal is annexed herewith and marked

as Annexure “P-7” (Page Nos ___ to ___).


Mismanaged, Calls for Retest Echo Nationally published by

Online Portal Youthkiawaaz is annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure “P-8” (Page Nos ___ to ___).

6.22 That gross technical errors and unfair conditions of

examination lead to widespread public outcry. Several

newspapers, websites, blogging portals reported of


remarkably poor conduct of CLAT 2018 by Respondent

No. 2 and 3. This includes articles published in Indian

Express, Youth Ki Awaaz, Legally India, Lawoctopus, Bar

and Bench, Zee Media etc. On 15.05.2018, Indian

Express also reported that conduct of CLAT 2018 was hit

by technical glitches and mismanagement.


hits with technical glitches and misman0agement published

by Education Desk of Indian Express, New Delhi is annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure “P-9” (Page Nos ___

to ___).

True Copy of Article dated 15.05.2018 titled Tip of CLAT

2018 Iceberg keeps growing: At least 1400 Students have

serious complaints as published by Legally India Online

Portal is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure “P-

10” (Page Nos ___ to ___).

6.23 That the Petitioners are filing this Writ Petition setting out

their grievances and instances of violation of their

fundamental rights. Additionally, it is also stated that

students from more than 20 states are gravely prejudiced

by unfair, unjust and mismanaged conduct of CLAT 2018

by Respondent No. 2 and 3. In view of extremely time


available the present Petition is filed by 6 students from

three (3) different states i.e., Delhi and Chhattisgarh.

However, more than 500 similarly situated students are

likely to join the present Petition in immediate future.

6.24 That on 15.05.2017, a number of online platforms

including Twitter and Facebook carried hundreds of

discussions about mismanagement and technical glitches

that vitiated the entire CLAT 2018 examination. A Google

Form Questionnaire was uploaded on the internet seeking

response of genuine exam takes and students who

appeared for CLAT 2018. It is appalling to mention that

within a day of the Google Form/Questionnaire going

online, more than one thousand (1000) students have

reported issues about technical glitches, infrastructural

short comings and illegalities committed in conduct of

CLAT 2018.

6.25 That the Petitioners herein duly submitted their

representation to the Respondent No. 2 and 3 herein

informing serious issues in conduct of examination. In the

Emails sent by the Petitioners to the Respondent No. 2 and

3 it was clearly mentioned that entire exam was marred by

technical problems, server shutdown, hanging of computer

systems, numerous power cuts, difficulty in login, blank

screens and errors in biometric verification.


True Copy of Representation dated ___.05.2018 submitted

by Petitioner No. ___ is annexed herewith and marked as


True Copy of Representation dated __.05.2018 submitted




by Petitioner No. ____ is annexed herewith and marked as






by Petitioner No. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as



by Petitioner No. 2 is annexed herewith and marked as


6.26 That the entire CLAT 2018 Examination stands vitiated due

its erroneous and improper conduct, which is bound to lead

to a flawed merit list. It is also essential to mention that

inspite of submission of Representation by the Petitioners


and thousands of other students/ law aspirants, no

response till date has been sent by the Respondent No. 2

and 3 herein. As usual, the Respondent No. 2 and 3 seek

to take advantage of the fixed examination schedule to

dodge the genuine grievances raised by Petitioners herein.

That this arbitrary conduct of the Respondent No. 2 and 3

amounts to violation of fundamental rights of the

Petitioners guaranteed under Article 14 and 21 of the

Constitution of India.

7. That as per the schedule of CLAT 2018 examination, result

along with rank list of the students is likely to be declared

on May 31, 2018. The entire exercise is going to result in

flawed merit list since more than thousand (1000)

students have admittedly faced problems ranging from

technical difficulty, server breakdown, power cuts, login

issues, difficulty in managing exam interface, problems in

bio-metric verification. In addition to this several other

issues such as poor examination infrastructure, lack of

competent invigilators and total apathy shown by

Respondent No. 2 and 3 leaves no room for doubt that the

CLAT 2018 examination must be re-conducted in light of

suitable instructions to be issued by this Hon‟ble Court.

8. That as per the information available on websites, few

students have already approached Hon‟ble High Court(s) at


Jaipur, Delhi and Chandigarh raising similar grievances.

Since the students who are aggrieved by arbitrary actions

of Respondent No. 2 and 3 hail from several states of Union

of India, it would be in the interest of justice to entertain

the present Petition. In short, the tiny window between the

declaration of exam results and admissions constitutes a

perfect fait accompli for the CLAT authorities, causing

serious harm to all students, both present and future and

impacts the integrity of the CLAT filter and the future of

legal education.

GROUNDS

9. That the Petitioners are approaching this Hon‟ble Court on

the following grounds which are taken without prejudice to

one another:

A. Because Common Law Admission Test 2018 conducted by

Respondent No. 2 and 3 is the single window admission

mechanism for students aspiring for admission to primer

National Law Universities based at seventeen (17)

different states of Union of India. The entire CLAT 2018

examination is vitiated due to widespread

mismanagement, technical problems and infrastructural

issues which are solely on account of gross negligence

exhibited by the Respondent No. 2 and Respondent No. 3

herein.


B. Because CLAT 2018 was designed to wholly be conducted

online and thus required flawless implementation in terms

of uninterrupted server operation, reliable computer

hardware and user friendly examination interface. The

entire CLAT 2018 examination was vitiated due to issues

such as blank screens, hanging of computer systems,

recurrent power cuts, discrepancies in time allotted to

various candidates and gross infrastructural deficiencies.

C. Because CLAT 2018 is a merit based competitive

examination. In other words, position of the Petitioners in

the rank list would drastically vary even based on score

gap of one (1) or two (2) marks. In such an examination

with limited time frame of 120 minutes, loss of time due

to technical issues may render the entire effort of

Petitioners futile.

D. Because Petitioners and thousands of other students who

appeared in the examination (CLAT 2018) prepared for

several months to seek admission into prestigious

National Law Universities. The entire effort of the

Petitioners would be rendered useless if Respondent No. 2

and 3 are permitted to ignore the representations

submitted by them. It is humbly submitted that

Respondent No. 2 and 3 cannot be permitted to take


advantage of their own wrong. It would be gross

miscarriage of justice if the Respondents are permitted to

take the defence of strict exam timeline at the cost of

future of Petitioners.

E. Because the Respondent No. 2 and 3 have failed to

address the representations submitted by Petitioner No. 1

to 6. There is clear violation of fundamental rights

guaranteed to the Petitioners under Article 14 and 21 of

Constitution of India. Further, Respondent No. 3 has

ignored widespread outcry of students across the nation

calling for a re-examination. Till date, the CLAT 2018 Core

Committee has not even uploaded a circular to explain the

steps proposed to be taken by them in view of

representation submitted by students across India.

F. Because the final rank list /merit list based on flawed

examination process of CLAT 2018 is bound to be as

arbitrary as the process which has selected the students.

Respondent No. 2 and 3 ought to have constituted a

committee of external experts to submit a report about

widespread problems faced by students regarding

examination server and examination infrastructure. To the

contrary, inspite of offering a window regarding the

submission of grievances, Respondent No. 2 and 3 have


not even acknowledged submission grievances/

representations by the Petitioners herein.

G. Because in a highly competitive examinations like CLAT

2018, there must be no scope for any error whatsoever. It

is in interest of future of Indian Legal Education and Legal

Profession that the impugned examination be quashed

with a direction for fresh and impeccable conduct of


H. Because by virtue of being opaque, ad-hoc, arbitrary,

inconsistent, and plagued by severe procedural defects in

conducting the examination, the conduct of Respondents

No. 2 and 3 in hosting CLAT examination 2018 has

resulted in a serious breach of the rights of students

under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

I. Because the rotation practice that has conferred the right

to conduct an examination marred with innumerable

problems, to an inexperienced university such as

Respondent No. 2 and 3 has lead to pulverizing the fate of

the students and thereby resulting in a gross violation of

Article 14 and Article 21.

J. Because the Petitioners have a limited window to approach

before this Hon‟ble Court, on account of the deliberate


inaction of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 in conveniently

waiting to formally declare the result on 31.05.2018. The

Respondents are well aware that results once declared will

seal the fate of the Petitioners and other similarly situated

individuals forever, and therefore have chosen not to act

on the representation filed by the Petitioners.

K. BECAUSE even otherwise, the Respondent No, 2 and 3 are

instrumentalities of the State since these are National Law

Universities constituted under an act of the State

Legislature, and therefore it is incumbent and a positive

obligation of the Respondent No. 2 and 3 to ensure that

the process of selection of the students is in strict

conformity with the principles of transparency, fair play,

and accountability. The manner in which the examination

was conducted on the fateful day of 13.05.2018 has

severely tarnished the future of the students beyond repair

and has consequently violated Part III.

L. Because, the very semblance of “Equal Opportunity”

preserved and protected under Article 16 is lost if the

Common Entrance Examination of such a stature is marred

with replete instances of gross negligence and

mismanagement. The most severely affected category

would be that of students who are meritorious and have

invested countless hours over months, if not years,


preparing to make their names in prestigious National Law

Universities.

M. Because, on having paid a certain amount for the purpose

of buying the application form, the Petitioners have a

legitimate expectation that atleast the manner in which the

examination will be conducted would be transparent and

fair. It is the affirmative duty of the State to ensure that

the amount spent is utilized. The conduct of examination

demonstrably suggests that the amount so spent by the

students was not utilized in devising a system which could

ensure that the examinations would confirm with the high

standards befitting the stature of National Law Universities.

N. Because the lack of transparency and the gross

mismanagement of the examination has resulted in

devastating consequences, and runs in absolute

contravention to the principles enunciated by this Hon‟ble

Court in the case of Modern Dental College & Research

Centre v. State of M.P. (2016) 7 SCC 353.

O. BECAUSE there was no uniformity in the manner in which

the invigilators were to handle situations arising due to

technical glitches. The extension of time was therefore

subjectively exercised, in absence of any uniform policy,

and largely to the whim of the invigilators who had no


clear instructions in this regard. This resulted in different

time extensions for different students, who were partaking

in the same entrance examination. In many cases the

examination lasted for 1.30 Hours only, whereas in other

centers the examination went on for about 4 hours. This

completely effaces the spirit of Article 14.

10. That the Petitioners have not filed any other similar

petition before this Hon‟ble Court or any other Hon‟ble

High Court.

11. That the present Petition is filed by only six (6) Petitioners

due to paucity of time. It is respectfully submitted that

several similarly placed students who had also appeared

for CLAT 2018 examination have similar grievances as is

expressed by the Petitioners herein in the present Writ

Petition. Petitioners seek liberty of this Hon‟ble Court to

add or amend the Memo of Parties or file necessary

applications as and when other similarly situated students

join them. Petitioners also crave liberty to add any other

ground which may be relevant for the adjudication of the

present Writ Petition in the interest of justice.

PRAYER

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and on the

grounds mentioned herein above, it is most respectfully prayed

that this Hon‟ble Court may graciously be pleased to:


(a) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash

Common Law Admission Test 2018 examination

conducted by Respondent No. 2 and 3 held on

13.05.2018 as per circular dated 20.12.2017; and

(b) Issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other

appropriate writ, order or direction to the Respondent

No. 2 and 3 to conduct fresh examination for

Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) qua the

Petitioners within a reasonable period of time; and

(c) Issue an appropriate order or direction staying the

publication of final result cum merit list till the

disposal of the present Writ Petition; and

(d) Issue an appropriate order or direction appointing a

committee of experts to examine the grounds raised

by Petitioners in their representations submitted to

Respondent No. 2 and 3 with a direction to submit a

report in a time bound manner; and

(e) Any other and further order(s) or direction (s) as this

Hon‟ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts

and circumstances of the present case and in the

interest of justice.


AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER AS IN

DUTY BOUND SHALL EVER PRAY

Filed By:

(ANAND SHANKAR JHA)

Advocate for Petitioners

V-5/B Green Park Extension

New Delhi – 110016

LL: 011-49059255/ 09899617989

Place: New Delhi Drawn on: ___.05.2018

Filed on: 18.05.2018
