The 2020 Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) convenor Prof Balraj Chauhan has released a statement on behalf of the consortium, assuring candidates of the overall integrity of the exam and responding to “genuine concerns”.

Apparently in response to our analysis published yesterday of the rank list, which showed perhaps surprisingly low scores achieved by the majority of aspirants, he wrote:

It should be understood that since the number of seats for admission in National Law Universities is already limited and there are more than 50,000 students appearing for the examination, it is quite logical that the percentage of candidates which would be selected out of these many candidates would be less.

In this light, the predictions of some online platforms on the lines of “Bell Curve” and histogram analysis should not be employed to create an argument that the result of CLAT 2020 is not that appreciative.

Chauhan also reiterated that any “hue and cry by a certain group of individuals and students alleging technical glitches and improper instructions is baseless”, which had been confirmed by the CLAT’s audit.

Any complaints by students about unclear instructions - apparently referring to the complaints of how the “mark for review” button and changing answers functioned - were due to students not being “very clear with the instructions and some coaching institutes failed to train the students and couldn’t comprehend it in the manner it was supposed to be”.

CLAT 2020 was “not a paper for the muggers”, he added, due to the change in test pattern to focus more on comprehension.

He concluded:

At last, I assure that the integrity of the question paper and the process of CLAT is transparent and fair enough to the best of my knowledge and in the interest of the aspirants.

The Supreme Court is due to hear the challenge of candidates on Friday.

Full note from Prof Chauhan

The full note of Prof Chauhan below:

The objective of writing this note to make my ardent aspirants of CLAT 2020 aware of the apt approach adopted in setting the question paper with the utmost care. I am of the opinion that every test of national and international level assesses a particular set of skills in one form or the other.

Moreover, it should be designed in such a way that can cater to the needs of every aspirant and should be free from any subjectivity. As a reader, our responses are usually subjective because of our personal likes and dislikes.

These personal likes and dislikes sometimes not only create natural disagreement but misguide genuine aspirants to a great extent.

In my recent readings, I have observed and realized that there is a genuine concern and need to clarify and remind my CLAT aspirants that the various stages (preorganization, organization and post organization) of CLAT 2020 were not structured overnight.

The organization part of CLAT 2020 is not monolithic in nature. It is as complex as human relations are. With this note, I am trying to make an attempt to resolve and highlight certain issues and facts about the concept and pattern of CLAT 2020 examination. In this regard, my observations are as follows:

This year CLAT examination was organised with a changed pattern and it was more of an application-based test. Comprehension and time management skills were a vital component to do well in CLAT 2020. The hue and cry by a certain group of individuals and students alleging technical glitches and improper instructions is baseless.

The audit has already confirmed that there were no technical glitches in the examination.

As far as the instructions are concerned, I feel that this lot was not very clear with the instructions and some coaching institutes failed to train the students and couldn’t comprehend it in the manner it was supposed to be.

It is important to note that we designed the questions this year in a way that it was a knowledge and reasoning-based paper through comprehensions to judge the decision-making capabilities of the aspirants and it was not a paper for the muggers, to filter out better talent suited for the legal profession.

The coaching institutes are aware with this pattern had no complaints and rather we can read on the web that the masses have appreciated this year’s questions and graded it as a high-quality paper.

Moreover, it is a competition just like other competitive examinations, the motive of which is to find out the best candidates suited for the profession who could understand, comprehend and apply the principles given in a contextual set up.

It should be understood that since the number of seats for admission in National Law Universities is already limited and there are more than 50,000 students appearing for the examination, it is quite logical that the percentage of candidates which would be selected out of these many candidates would be less.

In this light, the predictions of some online platforms on the lines of “Bell Curve” and histogram analysis should not be employed to create an argument that the result of CLAT 2020 is not that appreciative.

I as the Convenor, would also like to point out that, it is the duty of the Coaching Institutes and Centres to train their students on “Instructions” so that the students do not lose out on marks like they did in this examination.

In fact, following of instructions is yet another way of testing a candidate’s discipline while writing a competitive examination and it should not be compromised.

At last, I assure that the integrity of the question paper and the process of CLAT is transparent and fair enough to the best of my knowledge and in the interest of the aspirants.