In Brief
A premier law university sought to conduct its own entrance test (NLAT) instead of the national Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) during the COVID-19 pandemic to avoid a 'zero year'. The Supreme Court held that the university lacked statutory authority to issue an admission notification without Academic Council recommendation. As a member of the CLAT Consortium, it was bound by consortium bye-laws requiring CLAT-based admissions. The home-based online test mode lacked transparency and violated Article 14 rights by excluding marginalized students due to short notice and technical requirements. The Court quashed the notification, directed CLAT be held on 28 September 2020, and restored the university's participation in the Consortium.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.