[img]https://i.imgflip.com/4hjdrv.jpg[/img]

If only these challengers had cared to read the explicit instructions given by the Consortium on the examination day they wouldn't be trying to wreck the future of thousands of students who did read it. Atleast 20 minutes were provided to read the instructions on the desktop at the examination day and it took 2 mins for me to read them. These people are just enshrouding their ignoramus attitude and incompetency by using the avenue of petitions.

The SC will not stop the CLAT process. It will appoint some retired SC or HC judge to Chair some sort of inquiry/grievance redressal committee. All complaints etc will be directed to this committee, which is mostly going to go with what CLAT has to say. Eventually the aggrieved students having the best resources to amplify or articulate their "grievances" will get entry. The rest will peter out.

https://thewire.in/law/an-extra-legal-league-of-extraordinary-gentlemen

K Parameshwar is the Advocate on Record for the consortium, not a senior counsel.

Wish to submit that CLAT Consortium in its latest press briefing has said that they have utilized the services of TCS which has got TCS iON is the most reputed Service Provider. It has track record of successfully conducting various
National Level Admission Tests and the Recruitment Tests such as JEE Mains, JEE
Advanced, NEET (PG), GATE, Banking Services Examinations e.t.c. If we see the normal practice as being followed for larger exams like IIT-JEE and NEET being conducted by NTA for many years the option " Answered and Marked for Review" is evaluated, their instructions is very clear in this regard https://www.nta.ac.in/Quiz . Hence in the same country how we can practice two norms. Here the question is not the option "Marked for Review" rather it is " Answered and Marked for Review" which is evaluated in all big sized exams. Suppose even if they claim that had given in their instructions, but in their first three mocks these instructions were not there, even if they had given in their last mocks, the students would not have paid due attention basically due to two reasons, first the things got diluted in the aftermath of NLAT, secondly very important that, Consortium had repeated same questions as earlier in their las mocks and as there was nothing new in it, Students would have taken it casually, One more valid point here is that there was no marks awarded for these mocks by Consortium , even if some of them practiced they would not have come to know its impact on their marks. Moreover reading instructions at centre is also not a valid point, keeping in view the scaring environment at the centers whereby kids were supposed to follow social distancing and this resulted in their reaching their seat late. In many cases the reporting time itself was mentioned as 1.45 PM, The other fiasco was removal of calculator during last few days, If this was not required, this should not have been introduced at first instance itself. So if not rectified these errors shall adversely impact the career of the kids,

Let's pray and hope a retest happens.

The consortium is horribly irresponsible
The paper had so many errors
Some questions were wrong but were not taken downxeven after objection
Answers mismatch
It's almost suspicious

Tbh i couldn't have been more pleased with the news. As a dropper myself, i had dropped a year and with issues ranging from not being able to change answers without pressing clear response and mark for review not being evaluated left me from a score sufficient from the top 3 nlus to not even worth the last 4 of the NLUs itself. (Its not to defame any of the nlus). The whole process has been inherently unfair to some genuine candidates who have suffered at the edge of it while consortium in a very arrogant fashion declared that there was nothing wrong with the software and even denied to correct or review its own technical mistakes. May the court grant relief on me and many more such aggrieved candidates and provide respite in times of such uncertain and hopeless time for the law aspirants with a re exam WITH A GOOD SOFTWARE.

As a kid, I used to talk about cave enders. Only after I spoke to someone who had been there did I know that it was Keventers (now Kev's - Satya Niketan).

People calling Gopal Sankaranarayan GShanks reminds me of that time.

Is GSanks doing these cases pro bono?

A rest has to to happen because thousands of students were denied a fair chance. The current merit list is full of undeserving people. It is a FRAUD LIST.

I can name and shame the coaching centres which are flooding the net with fake news and propaganda against CLAT, but Kian will censor my comment.

The said petition must be rejected,keeping in mind,that the process of admission is delayed due to corona crisis. And if it will delayed further. The entire students of this batch will suffer with irrepairable loss. Because any court cannot compansate the time. Those who are very much interested in delaying the processes should have been directed to get them prepare for the next year.

The instructions were very clear. Each mock-exam starts with an instruction page and also the dashboard during the exam explicitly stated that the "Answered & Marked for review" would not be evaluvated. So clearly the contention that instructions were "inconvenient" an "confusing" does not seem valid. The other allegation was that the difference in the answers marked, in this case, SC may ask the consortium to make the audit trail available in a comprehenisble manner. The bottom line is , CLAT won't be quashed.