The Supreme Court on Monday(September 25) refused to interfere with the interim order passed by the Delhi High Court allowing the University of Delhi to admit students in the 5 year LL.B course of its Faculty of Law on the basis of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT).
Noting that the classes have already commenced, a bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud dismissed the special leave petition filed by a student, who demanded that the admission should be on the basis of the Common University Entrance Test (CUET) held by the University for other courses. CLAT is conducted by the Consortium of National Law Universities.
"This is an interlocutory order, we cannot interfere. You can argue in the High court. HC will consider it for the next year. For this year, HC thought let CLAT reign", CJI said.
On September 18, a division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula passed the interim order permitting the Delhi University to offer admissions in its newly introduced five-year integrated law courses on the basis of CLAT-UG 2023 score, only for the current academic year. The court was hearing a PIL challenging Delhi University’s decision to offer the said admissions solely on the basis of CLAT-UG 2023 score, instead of CUET.
The bench observed that the matter requires consideration and listed it for hearing for a broader question i.e. whether CUET should be mandatory for admissions in all Central Universities or if such varsities are at a liberty to admit students through other examinations conducted by other specialized agencies.
“However, for the present academic year 2023-24, as classes have already started, by way of interim relief, DU is permitted to admit students to its Five Year Integrated Law Course based on CLAT UG 2023,” the High Court ordered.
In today's digital era, the concept of "digital arrest" has taken center stage, reflecting the evolving legal response to cyber crimes in India. With the rise in online fraud, hacking, cyberbullying, and identity theft, the need to protect citizens and ...
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, a colonial-era law, criminalized "unnatural offenses," including consensual same-sex relationships. However, in a historic judgment on September 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of India decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults, marking a significant ...
The Supreme Court has reinstated an award originally granted by the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal (MACT). The apex court expressed disappointment over the approach taken by the High Court in evaluating the evidence and reinstated the MACT’s verdict. The Court ...
Dear community In the ever-evolving landscape of dispute resolution, the demand for faster and more efficient solutions is on the rise. As businesses and individuals seek alternatives to protracted litigation, arbitration has emerged as a compelling choice. Let's delve into ...
📘 Can a Minor Enter Into a Contract? ❌ Absolutely Not.As per Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a person must be of the age of majority (i.e., 18 years or 21 in certain guardianship cases) to enter ...
In a notable judgment, the Supreme Court has held that a document can produced during cross-examination in a civil trial to confront a party to the suit or a witness. The Court also held that there is no distinction between ...