CLAT confusion
The Common Law Admission Test, popularly known as CLAT, is the entrance examination for admission to 14 National Law Universities (NLUs) in India. Every year, thousands of students from all over the country take this exam.
CLAT results were announced on May 28, it led to confusion over supposedly incorrect declaration of ranks and wrongful allotment of institutions to students. The declared results were taken down by the National Law University, Jodhpur (NLUJ), CLAT 2012 organising institution, on the evening of May 28 itself, creating further confusion. The CLAT convener admitted these errors and mentioned that he is trying to resolve them judiciously (source: Legally India: www.legallyindia.com/201205312859/Pre-law-student/clat-2012-university-list-may-contain-errors-that-will-be-fixed-judiciously-in-june-says-nlu-j-vc).
CLAT 2012, comprised a number of questions being allegedly outside the declared CLAT syllabus for the year. Aspiring candidates found that about 70% of the Legal Aptitude section of the paper featured questions that required prior knowledge of legal provisions, while the syllabus had clearly stated that "candidates will not be tested on any prior knowledge of law or legal concepts. If a technical/legal term is used in the question, that term will be explained in the question itself." In addition, the general knowledge/current affairs section of the paper, which was supposed to test candidates only on their knowledge of 'current affairs,' "broadly defined as matters featuring in the mainstream media between March 2011 and March 2012," allegedly had 'static General Knowledge' questions on architect Le Corbusier's citizenship and shapes of oceans, to name a few.
A writ petition was filed before a single judge at the Delhi High Court abut a week ago (prior to the publication of results), against the organisers of CLAT 2012 for posing questions that were allegedly out of syllabus {Writ Petition (Civil) No 3208 of 2012}. However, the petition was dismissed, in limine, or without going into the merits of the case. The judge held that the petition was premature as the results had not been declared then, and suggested that the petitioners could approach the courts once the results were declared. A similar writ petition was also filed before the Allahabad High Court and is pending.
Courtesy: Myeducationtimes.com
0 comments