CLAT 2025 Consortium to Release Revised Results: Latest Updates

Overview: The Consortium of National Law Universities, often synonymous with controversy in recent years, finds itself under scrutiny yet again, as the Delhi High Court in the case of Aditya Singh v. Consortium of National Law Universities. has directed it to address evaluation errors in the CLAT 2025 answer key. In its order dated 20 December 2024, the bench led by Justice Jyoti Singh identified. 

The case was filed by 17-year-old Aditya Singh, who argued that errors in the answer key prejudiced his admission prospects. He contended that a proper evaluation would have improved his rank, potentially securing him a spot in a more prestigious NLU. The Petitioner specifically disputed the evaluation of five questions (Nos. 14, 37, 67, 68, and 100) from Question Paper Set-A. 

Read More: Everything that CLAT 2025 aspirants should know

While the Court has not explicitly ordered a revision of results, it has directed the Consortium to address specific evaluation errors. Justice Jyoti Singh remarked: 

“Accordingly, it is directed that the Petitioner's result be revised to award marks to him for Question No. 14 by the marking scheme. Since the Court has upheld Option ‘C’ as the correct answer, which was also the view of the Expert Committee, the benefit cannot be restricted only to the Petitioner. It will extend to all candidates who selected this option.” 

This effectively means that the Consortium will have to release revised results, as the maximum difference in marks could be up to 1.25. Such a change has the potential to cause a significant shift in ranks. 

Do you know how this change will affect your rank and marks?

Consortium’s Defense 

The Consortium maintained that it had followed a rigorous evaluation process involving expert and oversight committees. It asserted that courts lack the expertise to comment on assessments by academic bodies. However, the Court rejected this argument, noting that there is no absolute prohibition on Judicial Review in cases of demonstrable errors. 

Understand: The rank & merit list changes in CLAT 2025

The Consortium, represented by senior advocate Sandeep Sethi, argued that the case lacked merit and that the High Court did not have territorial jurisdiction since the Consortium is registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, with its secretariat in Bengaluru. 

The Court dismissed this objection, stating that the petitioner had attempted the exam within its territorial jurisdiction and that part of the cause of action arose in Delhi. 

Read More: Know all CLAT 2025 changes in the dates of counselling 

Important:

Question No. 14: Marks to be awarded to all candidates who selected Option ‘C,’ aligning with the Court’s directive. 

Question No. 100: To be excluded from the evaluation, as the correct answer was not listed among the options. 

Read More: Get all the details about CLAT 2025 latest changes

Impact on Results and Counseling 

The Court’s directive means that the Consortium will likely need to release revised results, as these changes could lead to a maximum difference of 1.25 marks, significantly affecting ranks and admissions. 

The Consortium has already emailed candidates that there will be a delay in the counselling process as it consults Senior Lawyers to determine the best course of action. With Senior Lawyers being consulted, the path forward remains unclear, leaving candidates uncertain about revised scores, updated ranks, and new counselling schedules. 

Understand: All details about CLAT 2025 Counselling 

The Road Ahead: 

The Consortium’s handling of this directive will be closely watched, as it may significantly influence this year’s admissions and its credibility in conducting future CLAT exams. For now, candidates must wait for clarity, as the future of CLAT 2025 admissions hangs in the balance. 

Know: What should you do now if you appear for CLAT 2025?

Conclusion:

The Consortium of National Law Universities will release revised CLAT 2025 results following a Delhi High Court judgment addressing answer key errors in Question Paper Set-A.

The Court directed that marks for Question 14 be awarded to candidates selecting Option ‘C,’ and Question 100 be excluded from evaluation due to incorrect options. These adjustments could cause rank shifts, with a maximum difference of 1.25 marks.

The counselling process is delayed as the Consortium consults senior lawyers, leaving candidates uncertain about updated scores, ranks, and schedules. The Consortium’s response is crucial for this year’s admissions and its credibility in conducting future exams, with clarity awaited on the admissions process.