As the Supreme Court is about to begin hearing the challenge by petitioners in the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) shortly, the CLAT Consortium has just uploaded the first provisional seat allotments, following its counselling process.
The first lists for each university are available here, or, rather than clicking to download each PDF:
We will be updating this post here live when there are updates.
11:56: Senior Gopal Sankaranarayanan for the petitioners: says 40,000 objections have been received, 21,000 were on questions and answers. The remainder of complaints and what exactly they concerned is unknown.
He is saying that cut-offs as low as -3 points, had “never happened before” in any exam in India.
These are “fatal software defects”, he said.
11:58: Sankaranarayanan now is pointing out the lowest scores of candidates invited to counselling, with scores such as -4.
12:00: Returning to an earlier point, he is continuing pointing out several questions that had obviously wrong answers. Earlier he had claimed that there were 20 errors in the answer key, which had not been addressed.
12:02: Counsel for CLAT, senior advocate PS Narasimha: Much of it is on the basis of misconception they have.
The expert committee has answered everything in detail, he says.
Regarding the very low scores who had been called to counselling, are purely scheduled tribe and scheduled caste candidates, who would not have made it to an actual university.
“We called everyone, he says.”
There was no criteria for minimum marks to get called for counselling, confirms the CLAT’s lawyer.
12:05: Counsel for CLAT is setting out several examples of candidates whose complaints made on social media, were not corroborated and “fraudulent” and “manipulated” documents had been shared, which did not check out.
12:07: As far as software glitches are concerned, this is an extraordinary situation. The CLAT had submitted an affidavit that the complaints are not correct.
Now raising the point regarding objections in the CLAT were free, unlike in other exams.
12:10: Narasimha says: You can see the background in which it happened (in oblique reference to the National Law Aptitude Test (NLAT)), there can not be any doubt about this one.
12:11: Somebody had filed a document before you by forging the marks they have got. His affidavit is not file. At page 3, the affidavit says. Somebody must take responsibility. The advocate for petition has received a lot of responses.
For example, has scored 150 marks, according to the original list, has scored only 1 mark.
The advocate has filed it on what basis?
12:13: Sankaranarayanan for petitioners: These people are completely incompetent in this exam and should be taken over by NTA.
He objects to the personal attacks made by Narasimha against the petitioner.
There are 20,000 objections [technical]. Their only answer is that the same organisation runs JEE or AIIMS. We don’t have a problem with JEE or AIIMS.
And they don’t reply to it.
9 or 10 other questions that are wrong have not addressed.
12:16: Sankaranarayanan says: They shouldn’t make it a fait accompli by finishing admissions.
12:16: The court: We are not inclined to pass any interim order, says the court.
Narasimha reminds the court that the court had ordered in the NLAT case that admissions should conclude by mid-October.
Sankaranarayanan says that their Lordships couldn’t have foreseen that the CLAT would be carried out so badly.
12:20: The judges noted that aggrieved candidates should send their grievances to the CLAT committee within two days, which should decide immediately thereafter.
Hearing over.