1723534562.png){kind=small}
An Open Letter to the Consortium of National Law Universities
December 28, 2024
Note: This Open Letter has been emailed to the Consortium and a printed copy of the same has also been sent to each of the member National Law University, as well as the Permanent Secretariat in Bangalore.
To the Convener, CLAT 2025 & other Members, Consortium of National Law Universities,
At the outset, I’d like to congratulate you on conducting CLAT 2025. Conducting a national-level examination of this stature is a monumental task, and the detailing it demands is something many of us cannot even fathom.
Before addressing the core purpose of this letter, a little context. I am a graduate of NLIU, Bhopal, and I, along with my team, have been running a “coaching centre” called LegalEdge-Toprankers for many years. Why the double inverted commas? Because we are well aware of the Consortium's apparent disapproval of us. We first sensed this in 2019/20 when one of the stated reasons for the CLAT pattern change was to discourage the coaching culture. Over the last five years, there have been multiple videos from your side explaining why coaching is no longer needed under the new pattern. You even went to the extent of including passages and questions in CLAT papers that highlighted the negative aspects of the coaching industry (e.g., a complete passage in CLAT 2024 and at least three questions in CLAT 2025).
Latest Updates: First Allotment Delayed Due to HC Order
While we understand that our industry needs to set its house in order, and despite some progress, there’s still a lot more to be done. That said, we can assure you that our industry is undergoing significant change, driven by healthy competition, stricter government regulations, and, perhaps surprisingly, by our own genuine intentions. Similarly, I would suggest that the Consortium also take bold steps to refine its processes. While we may not match your expertise in Law, we do know a thing or two about the needs, dreams, and heartbreaks of 17-18-year-olds.
Updates About: CLAT 2025 Counselling Process
Addressing the elephant in the room, the complete conduction of CLAT 2025 has caused terrible mental agony to CLAT aspirants. Starting with the first Sample Paper which had just 20 questions of which reasoning of at least 25% of them were deeply problematic, to the release of Sample Paper II which, for some reason, had one liner GK questions, to the last minute notification regarding underlining (we apreciate taking it back eventually), to the actual CLAT paper which was problematic at multiple levels but the biggest blunder being the wrong A.R. set. Now, the problem with a wrong A.R. set as compared to any other wrong question, is that students can only understand the error after spending at least 10-15 minutes on the same. The frustration and the helplessness of wasting 10-15 minutes in a 120-minute paper is something that none of us can truly understand. For many students, their chances of clearing CLAT went on a downward spiral in their own mind after this set.
Furthermore, the Provisional Answer Key had at least 10 errors. While we understand that that’s what the purpose of the ‘Provisional’ Answer Key is, but 65,000+ CLAT aspirants are justified in presuming that even the ‘Provisional’ Answer Key would have gone through at least 10 pairs of expert eyes and the blatant errors that each and every CLAT aspirant can very well see, experts would surely not miss.
Coming to results, we can only assume the compelling reasons that the Consortium would have had to release the CLAT result the night before AILET. However, I can demonstrate the impact it had on your own potential students. Some students were bold enough to not check their result before AILET but admittedly couldn’t sleep well that night and were also distracted during the exam. Those who checked, and didn’t get the results they were expecting, predictably messed up AILET. I know at least a dozen who didn’t even go for AILET, seeing their confidence hitting rock bottom after the CLAT results. However, the sinking feeling they were having was in major part also because of a few obviously wrong answers were not corrected, without justification, without reasoning and without clarity on if anything can now be done on this.
Do you know the difference between CLAT Marks vs Rank?
The purpose of this letter is not to rant endlessly but to offer constructive suggestions. While there has been certain welcome steps by the Consortium in the last few years, like timely replies to emails and calls, Mental Health sessions, providing carbonised OMR sheets and (slightly problematic) Sample Papers, a few more steps should be taken to make the examination completely fair, transparent and student friendly:
- Error Free CLAT: A lot of us prepare dozens and dozens of Mocks in a year exactly on CLAT format with lesser errors in each Mock than any CLAT paper of the last many years. Please have better systems in place to eliminate errors. Just solving this singular problem will go a long way towards making CLAT an entrance other entrances would want to emulate.
- Solutions & Analysis: To add to point 1, alongside your Answer Key, giving solutions to each question (and if possible, video analysis by an expert), acts as a natural eliminator of errors, since it’s virtually impossible to justify a wrong answer.
- Sample Papers: Please take the exercise of releasing Sample Papers with the same seriousness as making the actual CLAT paper, since that’s how each CLAT aspirant anyway takes it. When questions in Sample Papers, even inadvertently, deviates from the CLAT pattern, it increases mental pressure on thousands of serious CLAT aspirants.
- Fees for Objections: Though it’s the prerogative of the Consortium to decide on the fees for raising objections, you should also understand that the same amount for all other prominent exams is just Rs.200/- per objection (JEE, NEET and CUET). We, the Coaching centres, also bear this fee on behalf of students and file objections each year but due to various misconceptions, hundreds/thousands of students end up paying this amount, which should be reviewed by the Consortium.
- Review Pattern: While even we were aligned on the intentions of the Consortium behind changing the pattern in 2019/20, as they wanted students we are a lot well read, the type of questions which have been included in last 2 years need a relook. Including answers of questions in the passage itself (Current Affairs section), giving straightforward comprehension questions as a part of Legal Reasoning and making a random mix of questions, some requiring prior legal knowledge and others not., only ends up confusing the serious students and ends up benefiting the lucky ones over the deserving ones.
- Empathy through Actions: We understand that the Consortium consists of over two dozen teachers who have practically spent their whole life with students. The same is reflected in a lot of noble initiatives that you have taken in the last five-six years. However, this empathy has been undone by lapse in systems which has resulted in wrong answers year after year (even in final Answer Key), a lot of centres giving 10 minutes extra to fill up OMR in 2021 and 2023, the ‘mark for review’ fiasco in 2020, a range of issues in CLAT 2018, in addition to everything which is happening this year. Preventing such systemic issues will demonstrate your empathy not just in spirit but in actions too.
- Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done (Rex v. Sussex Justices, [1924] 1 KB 256): When the Counselling process and portal for filing grievances is open at the same time (and open even after the last date of paying Counselling fees), it communicates to a CLAT aspirant that this mechanism is just superficial and nothing shall be done regarding remaining errors. We’d sincerely request the Consortium to take care of such anomalies as it reduces the faith of CLAT aspirants on the Consortium.
Read More: Latest News on Seat Allotment in CLAT 2025
Sir, it’s difficult for both of us to be friends, but we need not be adversaries. While we both seek different outcomes, we’re both ‘Coaches’ of students seeking a bright career in Law. I hope this letter is received in the spirit it is written—with the utmost respect and a genuine desire to support the Consortium’s mission of creating a fair and transparent CLAT examination. On behalf of all current and future CLAT aspirants, we look forward to seeing CLAT evolve as a Gold standard for entrances in years to come.
Thank You,
Harsh Gagrani
A Proud NLU Alumnus
P.S.: I’ve been fortunate enough to have been a student of at least two members of the Consortium and have nothing but deepest respect for them and the other members. Since there might be concerns that these suggestions shouldn’t be treated seriously as it’s coming from the owner of a “Coaching Centre”, in such a case, please treat them as coming from an old student and someone with a deep love and respect for Law as a Career, his students and his teachers, not necessarily in that order.
P.P.S.: This wasn't a part of the original draft, but I'm compelled to add it today after hearing about your decision to approach the S.C. against the Delhi H.C. order.
Sir, "Genius is about knowing when to stop". This year, certain errors have already been made, and there's no undoing them. However, by continuing to escalate the matter, the only ones suffering are the CLAT 2025 aspirants. Ignoring the advice of your esteemed legal team and proceeding with a revised Rank List as per the Delhi H.C.’s judgment would at this point of time, be the wisest thing to do. It will not only ease the anxiety of thousands of students but also send a strong message—that the Consortium has the humility to acknowledge its mistakes and the courage to prioritize fairness above everything else.