&w=3840&q=100)
Delhi HC directs NLU to avoid excessive fees, declare revised result
The Delhi High Court on Friday directed the Consortium of National Law Universities (NLU) to avoid charging 'excessive' fees for raising objections to questions in future Common Law Admission Tests (CLAT).
The court also granted relief to postgraduate students who appeared for CLAT PG 2025 over alleged errors in the answer key and directed the Consortium to declare the revised results at the earliest.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela disposed of a batch of petitions challenging the CLAT PG 2025 results, conducted on 1 December last year.
The petitioners in the case were Anam Khan, Nitika, and Ayush Agrawal.
They argued that while most national-level exams charge between ₹100 and ₹200 to challenge a question, the CLAT objection fee stood at ₹1,000 per question—an amount they described as excessive and arbitrary.
While the court agreed that the fee was steep, it declined to quash the levy for this year's exam, noting that such a move could create complications and unnecessary litigation.
'Quashing such levy at this point in time may entail obstacles which may be unnecessary and may result in litigations which are not required,' the court stated.
'However, we expect that the aforesaid observations would be sufficient for the Consortium to take heed of and take appropriate steps to avoid such excessive fee in the next examinations, scheduled for the following years,' the bench added.
The order follows a separate legal battle regarding the undergraduate version of the exam.
In December 2024, a single judge found two questions in the CLAT UG 2025 paper to be erroneous and directed the Consortium to revise the result. That decision was later appealed before the High Court.
On 23 April, Chief Justice Upadhyaya ruled on the appeal, ordering revisions to the result.
However, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order on 7 May and directed the Consortium to issue a revised result, which was subsequently declared.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Rape of B'desh Hindu woman sparks anger, BNP 'supporter' held
Dhaka: The alleged rape of a 26-year-old minority Hindu woman in Bangladesh's Cumilla district by a "supporter" of former PM Khaleda Zia's BNP has sparked widespread outrage, with the High Court directing that the video of her assault, which went viral on social media, be removed immediately and she be given police protection. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Fazar Ali has been arrested on the charge of rape while four others are accused of making and circulating the video, said authorities, who have also been directed to ensure medical support to the woman. HC asked them to file a report within 15 days on the progress of investigations into the Thursday night incident. The video surfaced online on Saturday night. Condemning the incident and demanding exemplary punishment, BNP secretary general Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir said there is a "dangerous conspiracy afoot to damage BNP's reputation". The party is yet to clarify whether Fazar was linked to it. Fakhrul claimed the woman was a Hindu expatriate's wife. Fazar, after the Sheikh Hasina-led Awami League govt's fall last year, started introducing himself as a BNP member and attending its programmes, according to sources in political parties. He's seen in photos of BNP's Ramchandrapur South Union office's inauguration on Dec 14 last year. University students, including in Dhaka, held marches in solidarity with the victim, calling for justice. While Naripokkho, a women's rights body, called on citizens to break silence and resist violence against women, human rights organisations such as Ain o-Salish Kendra and Manusher Jonno Foundation called for "swift trial and exemplary punishment". The woman filed a case on Friday. She said she had come with her children to visit her parents, and on Thursday night, Fazar came to her house and asked her to open the door. When she refused, he broke the door, entered the house and raped her, according to authorities.
Economic Times
5 hours ago
- Economic Times
UK High Court Rules F-35 jet parts exports to Israel are lawful despite humanitarian concerns
Despite concerns over potential breaches of international law in Gaza, the UK High Court has ruled lawful the government's continued export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel. This decision follows a legal challenge by human rights groups, arguing the exports violate international obligations. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Popular in International 1. Harry and Meghan to play key roles in King Charles' funeral despite Royal tensions London's High Court has ruled that the UK government's decision to continue exporting components for F-35 fighter jets to Israel is lawful, even though the court acknowledged the risk that these parts could be used in ways that breach international humanitarian law in legal challenge was brought by Al-Haq , a Palestinian human rights group, with support from organizations including Amnesty International, Oxfam , and Human Rights Watch. They argued that supplying F-35 parts violated Britain's obligations under international law, especially the Geneva Conventions, given evidence of civilian harm in the ongoing conflict in UK government had partially suspended 30 out of 350 arms export licenses to Israel in September 2024, following concerns about their possible use in breaches of international law. However, licenses related to F-35 components were exempted. The government defended this carve-out by citing the UK's participation in a global supply chain for the F-35, a program involving the US, Israel, and NATO partners. Officials argued that halting these exports would disrupt international security cooperation and undermine allied confidence in the UK's their 72-page ruling, Justices Stephen Males and Karen Steyn stated that the matter was 'a highly sensitive and political question' best left to the executive branch, which is accountable to Parliament and the electorate, not the courts. The judges concluded that the UK's role in the multinational F-35 program is a matter of national and international security, and not for judicial rights groups expressed disappointment and are considering an appeal, but for now, the UK's exports of F-35 jet parts to Israel will continue under the current policy.
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
UK High Court Rules F-35 jet parts exports to Israel are lawful despite humanitarian concerns
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel London's High Court has ruled that the UK government's decision to continue exporting components for F-35 fighter jets to Israel is lawful, even though the court acknowledged the risk that these parts could be used in ways that breach international humanitarian law in legal challenge was brought by Al-Haq , a Palestinian human rights group, with support from organizations including Amnesty International, Oxfam , and Human Rights Watch. They argued that supplying F-35 parts violated Britain's obligations under international law, especially the Geneva Conventions, given evidence of civilian harm in the ongoing conflict in UK government had partially suspended 30 out of 350 arms export licenses to Israel in September 2024, following concerns about their possible use in breaches of international law. However, licenses related to F-35 components were exempted. The government defended this carve-out by citing the UK's participation in a global supply chain for the F-35, a program involving the US, Israel, and NATO partners. Officials argued that halting these exports would disrupt international security cooperation and undermine allied confidence in the UK's their 72-page ruling, Justices Stephen Males and Karen Steyn stated that the matter was 'a highly sensitive and political question' best left to the executive branch, which is accountable to Parliament and the electorate, not the courts. The judges concluded that the UK's role in the multinational F-35 program is a matter of national and international security, and not for judicial rights groups expressed disappointment and are considering an appeal, but for now, the UK's exports of F-35 jet parts to Israel will continue under the current policy.
