After initially criticising the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) national law universities’ approach of holding centre-based law school admissions tests as everything from not “patriotic” and carrying the “risk” of “mass infection” of candidates and their families, NLU Delhi has done an about turn and announced that it too would hold a centre-based physical test.
This follows more than a month of preparations for a home-proctored test, as conducted by the LSAT-India last week and by the Symbiosis group of law schools since the weekend, where reports of potential cheating surfaced, though a Symbiosis official vowed to identify any such instances.
As we had also reported, the AILET also now stands postponed.
According to an announcement on NLU Delhi’s website (see PDF below):
In view of the current situation of the pandemic Covid-19, as well as multiple requests received from the candidates, the AILET 2020 scheduled on August 18, 2020 has been postponed. The new date of the entrance Test will be notified shortly. At least 10 days’ prior notice will be given for the new date.
The NLU Delhi & NTA will come up with a fresh list of test centres across the country for the conduct of AILET 2020 as CENTRE BASED REMOTE PROCTORED TEST. The candidates will be provided with a choice of opting the test centre as per their convenience. The notification to this effect will be issued separately.
Further, the last date for submission of online application forms has also been extended upto August 10, 2020.
If both CLAT and AILET are now essentially going for an online test that will be held at physical test centres, and with the convenors for both being national law schools, AILET’s decision - especially in the midst of a deadly pandemic - does raise the question of why both should not be combined this year, rather than risking 50,000 or more CLAT takers and most likely a smaller subset of around 20,000 of those who will take the AILET, all travelling to test centres, twice in the latter case.
Then again, there is no absolute guarantee that the CLAT will happen as scheduled on 22 August either, with coronavirus infections continuing to climb at a rapid pace.
The Supreme Court, meanwhile, has declined to intervene in a Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) exam held online in test centres, according to multiple reports.
[documentcloud NLU Delhi postponed, to go offline
Comments
The issue is of representation of OBC in NLUs.
Since last two days it is trending on twitter.
Secondly, you surely aren't a good lawyer or a good prospective candidate. You clearly assumed a very narrow definition of useful--there are benefits both tangible and intangible that a circus tiger provides. And thus must have some use.
Coming to your point on sheep, ofcourse they are useful too. It's the food chain. NLUD lions will rule the litigation. While other NLU sheeps will be corporate clerks.
1. India will become #1 in Covid cases in a few weeks from now.
2. The number of reported cases will keep rising.
3. The government will have to ban all gatherings beyond 10 people.
4. The lives of your parents and grandparents are important than a law entrance exam.
5. Therefore, CLAT and AILET must be cancelled for 2020.
If people went to such lengths to cheat in LSAT and SLAT, I can't imagine to what extent they'd go to for a seat through AILET. All this AI monitoring for online exams is absolute hogwash. Unlike Jindal and Symbi which are private law schools with near zero accountability so far as merit is concerned, public institutions cannot EVER afford to compromise on merit.
No one from the General category at NLUD comes through backdoor entries. (Name even one with proof if you have it on record). Why don’t you check the corresponding CLAT ranks if you’re so keen? Almost everyone will have atleast a 3-digit CLAT tank.
If you’re referring to people producing fake caste or PWD certificates, then those same people do that in CLAT as well. Go check. If you’re referring to LLM admissions, then I’m not in a position to judge that since I really don’t know nor do I care.
As for your top law school, the only place where you could be from is NLS. And as I recall, almost all the top NLUs do have nearly 10-15% seats for Foreign Nationals and NRIs. And FNs don’t sit for either CLAT or AILET while there is NRI quota at NLUD.
Judging from your salty language though, I highly doubt you’re from a better law school. Even if you are, you seem quite insecure about it judging by your troll-like attempts to insinuate unverifiable facts against other places and your obvious glee at mudslinging.
But you can say whatever you want over here, so go ahead. I agree with my Israeli friend on top about his judgement on this.
I never said anything about the other claims about NLUD on this website which you are now talking about (many of which I accept are trollish in nature and aren’t true). I only responded to your initial comment. You then equated yourself with NLUD trolls on this website in your justification for not having to give any factual backing to your claims about backdoor AILET entry. If you want to engage, atleast come with proper facts and provide names for you “backdoor entries”. But clearly, you only have opinion and no real knowledge.
Also, I agree that there are indeed many problems at the NLUD (as is the case in the other law schools) but I am not here on some jingoistic pride about the college. If you want to engage, then speak up properly rather than trying to be a smart ass. You seem to have no actual evidence if you’re claiming that the Uni just “hushed things up” despite faculty filing cases. Both of which are highly improbable for a public university.
If a case was filed in Court regarding an open category LLB admission (which is the flagship programme of all NLUs) through some "backdoor" formula, that too by a member of faculty, it's unlikely that any public university can silently hush it up to the rest of the world, but somehow some random non-NLUD commentator on LI knows all about it.
Like I said, give names, state facts or provide reference. If it is true, I have no problem admitting that it's then a sad state of affairs and adds to the problems already facing the college.
And yes we want centre based test as SLAT Exam faced a lot of cheating instances. And we are in a very tense situation till 7th July till SLAT results are out
At this point i don't think any other sections than Gk in clat have any cheating potential as it is sort of a read and understand question trope where you can only answer if you read the passage and hence eliminating the scope of cheating.
So tbh, i think clat should remove the gk section and test the other section in a home proctored rpt based mode.
In the comment sections, I saw that many people are criticising the rpt based exam of lsat and slat, well for SLAT, i do agree it was very easily copied. But, lsat as far as my knowledge goes I think its really tough to copy in that kind of test.
Hence I think a gk less home proctored CLAT will be the safest and the most sound way to conduct the exam despite the tough circumstances revolving around.