The Rajasthan high court’s Jaipur bench on Tuesday (30 June) ordered the “last student” admitted to NLSIU Bangalore, or “Bangalore Law College” - as the high court order put it - to be reserved subject to the result of the writ petition before it, as the Bombay high court CLAT challenge was postponed to 7 July.
The date of the Jaipur hearing was originally set for 29 June, but the senior counsel for CLAT convener did not appear on the date and the hearing was postponed for the next day, according to Dinesh Yadav, counsel for the petitioner Rashi Mangal.
Yadav said that on 30June, CLAT’s senior counsel did appear but could not answer the objections against 15 questions of the undergraduate exam that had been raised by the petitioner. Instead, the CLAT convener’s counsel asked for more time to respond.
The order noted that Yadav “strongly objected” to this and contended that the CLAT convener had already been given ample time to respond. And as the last date for admissions closes on 4th July, the writ would become infructuous if further delays were allowed. Yadav therefore requested the court to grant some form of relief to his petitioner pending the CLAT convener’s response.
Justice Alok Sharma then ordered that admission for the “last student” of NLSIU Bangalore “shall be subject to the outcome of this writ petition”:
“… taking into consideration the overall facts of the case, more particularly the fact that reply to the petition has not been filed for the last about fifteen days despite service while the admission process based on CLAT examination under challenge goes on, it would be fair, balancing equities between the contesting parties, to direct that admission of the last student to Bangalore Law College shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition.”
The petitioner’s first preference was NLSIU Bangalore, and if the petitioner’s objections were found to be valid and the writ allowed, her resultant marks and ranking would qualify her for admission to NLSIU Bangalore.
She has currently obtained admission in RMNLU Lucknow with an All India Rank of 570.
How the writ would affect other candidates, and if the “last candidate” referred to in the order would lose their seat if the petition is successful was not immediately clear. The next hearing is slated for 10 July.
Bombay matter: Adjourned after judicial illness
The proceedings in the Bombay high court could not take place as the presiding judge, Justice Anoop V Mohta, has been absent due to illness.
The Bombay high court’s website shows the next date of hearing set as 7 July.
There are four other petitions currently pending relating to the CLAT, as reported by Legally India. Click here for a summary of all and possible outcomes.
Comments
It may be obvious from context, but are we supposed to read between the lines and guess at what a high court means in their orders?
A little bit of precision in orders is surely not too much to ask for :)
Even the author was able to clearly identify what is meant by the order but you sir who is the 'face of Indian Legal Journalism' demand clarity (although i agree we could do with better writing skills)
"read between the lines" - "obvious from [the] context" - are you sure you want to use those in same sentence? would have been a very damaging argument had a lawyer made it in court(oh wait u did study law right??? - which college?)
Just in case you were only trying to justify colleague's wrk - then it's a different thing :))
Now let's see if you/legally India publish this.