Bar and Bench Profile picture
Sep 17, 2020 74 tweets 37 min read Read on X
Supreme Court to shortly resume hearing the challenge to National Law School of India University (NLSIU) Bangalore's move to conduct its separate entrance exam - the National Law Aptitude Test (NLAT)

@NLSIUofficial
#NLATvsCLAT
#SupremeCourt Image
Petitioners had informed the top court on Wednesday that #NLAT was not an exam for merit but for someone's competency in manipulation.

barandbench.com/news/nlat-2020…
The Bench of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and MR Shah has assembled.

The matter will be taken up shortly.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT Image
Hearing begins for the day.

Senior Advocate Arvind Datar (for NLSIU) is the first to address the Court.

@NLSIUofficial #SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT
Datar: The three core issues I'll address are:

- Role of executive council vis-a-vis academic council

- Whether NLS being memeber of consortium could have conducted a separate exam

- Nature of exam
Justice Bhushan: And fourth issue you address on is that a large number of students were deprived from appearing for the exam because of the short notice. So violation of Article 14 also needs to be addressed
Datar: And the fifth issue I'll address on is locus standi and maintainability.

Justice Bhushan: Petitioner no. 2 has sufficient locus.

Datar: He was the former VC of NLSIU.
Datar: They should have been challenged by the CLAT itself.
Datar addresses on the point of consortium.

Datar: Prayer C is not available anymore because CLAT has removed me from the Consortium.

Justice Bhushan: They have removed only from the office, not from the Consortium.

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial
Datar refers to minutes of the meeting of the members of the Consortium where it was opined that if NLSIU proceeds with the separate exam, it cannot remain part of the Consortium.

Justice Shah: It was only an opinion.
Datar reads the resolution passed by the governing body of the Consortium through which the VC of NLSIU was divested of his position held in thr Consortium.

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial #NLAT2020 #NLAT
Datar: Yesterday they (governing body of the Consortium) wrote a letter to me asking me to transfer all the funds to NALSAR, Hyderabad.

Justice Bhushan: Mr. Datar, they have to conduct the CLAT for aspirants all over the country. This is not only about one University.
Datar: They say that the NLSIU cannot remain part of the Consortium.

Justice Bhushan: We will ask them to clarify on this.

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial #NLAT2020 #NLAT
Datar addresses the Court on the issue of executive council vis-a-vis academic council.

Datar; Academic council will be responsible for the maintenance of standard of education in the School/University and does not have anything to do with the Entrance exam.
Datar: The executive council is responsible for making regulations and for amending and modifying them.

The proposition is if a regulatory body has not made regulations then chief executive body can act in the absence of regulations.

(Datar cites precedent of SC on this)
Datar: There cannot be vacuum.

Justice Bhushan: You're right that there cannot be vacuum and for a period of time there are no regulations, the body can act.

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial #NLAT2020 #NLAT
Datar: With regard to conduct of exam, academic council can make recommendations as regards who can be the examiner.

(Datar now refers to regulations that provide for appointment of VC by the Executive committee)
(Datar reads the provisions from regulations which empower VC to take actions in certain situations which can be addressed and approved by the committee later)

Datar: This is like taking an action and getting it ratified.

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial #NLAT2020
Datar: (In relation to NLSIU) Academic council makes the recommendations and it is the Executive Council that approves the recommendations.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 @NLSIUofficial
Datar: I will refer to decisions and how CLAT came about but till date there is no direction from the Court saying there shall be a common exam.

There is no mandate from the SC for holding a common test like CLAT... We just came together to form a society for this.
Datar: Will justify why I held a separate exam.

Justice Reddy: When you took the decision to hold the test, were you part of the society?

Datar: Yes. But I will justify

Justice Reddy: Legally, as part of the society could you have separated from the society to hold the exam?
Datar: The by-laws of the society are like agreement

Justice Shah: Did you inform the Consortium that you were going to hold a separate exam.

Datar: Number of times. I had mentioned that we have a trimester system, don't postpone CLAT further. This was not a knee-jerk reaction.
Justice Reddy: So as on today you are part of the Consortium?

Datar: I have not exited the Consortium. But my submission is they have said as for #CLAT2020 I am no longer part of it and have asked for all records, accounts to be shifted to Hyderabad. I have not exited.
Datar: On 10 or 12th August it was decided that exam will be held on Sept 7.

On Aug 28 a meeting was held and they postponed it on the grounds that WB has lockdown on Sept 7 and Bihar on Sept 6. But why not hold it on Sept 13?

#SupremeCourt @NLSIUofficial #NLAT2020
(Datar takes the Court through all the decisions the Consortium this year of postponing the exam)

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial #CLAT2020 #CLAT
Datar: They say unanimous as if I am a party to it. Meeting of consortium held on August 27 and they say resolution was with my consent. In my affidavit I have said it did not have my consent

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial #CLAT2020 #CLAT
Datar: General body of NLU consortium met on August 10 decide when can CLAT be held. Clat2020 was decided to be held on Sept 7. It was signed by Secy treasurer

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial #CLAT2020 #CLAT
Datar: CLAT reschedule notofication was therefater issued to hold it on Sept 28. Lockdown announcement in WB was on Sept 7 hence CLAT was postponed.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial #CLAT2020 #CLAT
Datar: I understand there was lockdown, but then hold it on Sept 8 or Sept 9. Deliberately they put it to Sept 20.

SC: You have signed this no?

Datar: I have denied it in my affidavit.

SC: Okay we eill make note that you have not signed it.

#SupremeCourt
Datar: Whether you call it doctrine of necessity or frustration or overriding circumstances...

But my submission is that the bylaws are in the nature of a contract, if performance of the contract become imposible, I can take my own decisions

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020
Justice Reddy: It is a co-operative society?

Datar: This is only a society, not cooperative society. We are registered under the Societies Registration Act. In case of cooperative societies, bylaws are much more onerous.

#NLAT2020 @NLSIUofficial
(Datar is taking the Court through the aims and objectives of the society, says that conducting entrance exam is one of them.)

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT #CLAT2020
Datar (quoting the clauses of the by-laws): By joining CLAT, we have not surrendered our autonomy.

For MPhil courses, the bylaws are not fully implemented since everyone is conducting their own exams.
Datar: I want to make it clear, Justice Reddy asked if I'm still part so I said that this year due to the zero year problems, I will hold my exam only for this year.

For my autonomy, I can take that decision.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial
Datar: Petitioners are alleging that I have violated the bylaws but I want to ask that where in the bylaws does it justify for them to postpone the exam without consulting all the VCs?

Where does it provide for shifting of accounts, records to Hyderabad?
Datar: There are many statements made that the exam was bogus and purity was not maintained.

Justice Bhushan: We have gone through the affidavit.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT @NLSIUofficial
Justice Bhushan: We are sure the University would have taken steps to maintain the purity of the exam.

Justice Shah: But when there were allegations of certain malpractices in the exam, you also admitted it that there were malpractices but secrecy of exam was not compromised.
Datar: The day the CLAT took a decision to postpone, we called our faculty meeting and considered the options before us for this year

(Datar is reading from the affidavit on this regard)
Datar: Options before us were

- online entrance exam at centres identified across the country
- Home based proctored online exam

#SupremeCourt
#NLAT2020
Datar: Our entrance fee is ₹150 because we wanted to make it accessible.

We made the exam 45 minutes long

Exam notification says we are following CLAT but the exam instead of 2 years was for 45 minutes.
Datar: Mr. Gopal Sankarnarayanan had made a comment that we were changing the game, when asked to play cricket, we asked them to play football.

But no, students were preparing for a test match and they were asked to play a 50 over match. It's still cricket.
Justice Shah: But the point is students were preparing for a 2 hour long exam and suddenly at such short notice they were told that now their exam is only 45 minutes long.
Datar: The syllabus is the same. But instead of a 2 hour exam we have shrunk it to 45 minutes. Marking system is the same as CLAT.
(On a lighter note)

Justice Shah: Mr. Datar, we have you one hour to argue, you have exceeded that time, so should we fail you?

Datar: Fail me Your Lordships but don't allow the Writ petition.

(All laugh)

#CourtroomExchange #SupremeCourt
Datar: Sometimes I think it's good I don't have to apply now because I wouldn't have been able to crack these entrance exams.

(Other lawyers on screen nodding and smiling)

#SupremeCourt #CourtroomExchange
Datar continues his submissions.

Datar: Now, even the number of questions were along with the time.

Justice Reddy: Why only 20,000 something students could appear for your exam? This is a top law school

@NLSIUofficial #SupremeCourt
SC: There was shortage of time for students to apply.

Datar: There was plenty of time to apply. And we have engaged the best possible vendor for conduction of the exam.

Datar concludes his arguments

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020
Senior Counsel Sajan Poovayya, for VC of NLSIU, begins making his submissions.

Poovayya first addresses the issue of change in format of the entrance exam.

Poovayya: Mine is an exam of lower pressure threshold. Students had to answer 45 questions in 45 minutes
Poovayya: The press release on malpractices said that we had taken note of complaints and we have zero tolerance for malpractices and we will look into it

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020
Poovayya: In a physical exam, invigilation takes care of physical acts of malpractices like removing chits etc but in a remote exam, invigilation is not restricted to this.

In remote proctored exam, even the data on key strokes of the computer system is collected.
Poovayya: Extensive technical safeguards were taken.

We made use of AI based proctoring which assesses aspects such as number of times window switch took place.

One of the most renowned firms does a post test auditing of this data.
Poovayya: Other safeguards are answer behaviour pattern and device information including candidate's key strokes' data.

Or traditional intelligence on exam.oaoer leak does not apply here. There is no single exam paper. Questions are similar but there are three batches.
Poovayya: No two persons got the question paper where the questions were in the same order. They all got same batch of questions in one batch of exam, but order was different.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #NLAT
Poovayya: The results are not out, they will be out subject to My Lords' decision but we have analysed all the data from the exam and it has been found that those candidates that engaged in malpractices have been disqualified.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020
Poovayya: Then, the decision to hold a home proctored online exam was not mine. The options were placed before the entire faculty and a unanimous decision was taken yo hold the exam in this form.
Poovayya: When the first time the decision was taken to defer the CLAT to June, I didn't oppose and NLSIU didn't oppose because I wouldn't have suffered a zero year.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 @NLSIUofficial
Poovayya: The Executive Committee has no authority to take a decision on behalf of the Consortium, till it is done in line with the bylines

@NLSIUofficial #SupremeCourt #NLAT2020
(Poovayya takes the Court through the timeline of subsequent deferrals of the CLAT2020 to a point that NLSIU faced the risk of zero year)

Poovayya: Mine is the only law University in the country that has a trimester system and the rigours of the this system are difficult.
Poovayya: Today in the beginning even Mr. Gopal Sankarnarayanan corrected his submission from earlier to agree that NLSIU is the only University for law to have trimester system.
Poovayya concludes.

Senior Advocate PS Narasimha makes his submissions.

Narasimha: We are all here for saving the institution. Today the question is if the very existence of this institution.

#SupremeCourt
(Narasimha is representing the Consortium)

Narasimha: The benefits for the students of coming together of all the Universities were enormous.

All statutory bodies coming together and forming this association takes the form of a quasi statutory authority.

#SupremeCourt
Narasimha: After the judicial intervention and efforts of all the stakeholders of coming together, the consortium was formed for the purpose of holding a common entrance exam for the students

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
Narasimha: Mr. Datar has referred to it as though it's a contract but we are in the realm of public law. Please don't relegate us to the contract Act.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
Narasimha: The way this matter has gone on really pains me because I was involved since the beginning. Pre consortium was a hand holding exercise.

It was ensured that National law schools would hold the exam in the said manner.

#SupremeCourt
Narasimha: What will happen to the whole purpose of it if everyone wants to walk on and walk out. It is not a private club, all of them subserve an important obligation.

Everything will collapse.

(Narasimha concludes)

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
Senior Advocate Nidhesh Gupta, for the petitioner, makes brief rejoinder arguments.

Gupta: Factually to say that the governing body (of the Consortium) made the decisions is not right.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
(Gupta contests the submission made by the VC of NLSIU that the signature in the decision to hold CLAT on September 20 is not his.)

Gupta: He opposes the decision but nowhere does it say that the signature is not his.

#SupremeCourt
Senior Advocate Nikhil Nayyar representing a petitioner in an SLP makes submissions now.

Nayyar refers to the SC's decision of April 29, 2020 in relation to NEET exam.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
Nayyar: When the first press release came, students had five months... it was extended later.

When it was being extended, it was clearly said that you would be given a 21 day notice in case of further extension.
Nayyar: Students are prejudiced in this new format.

- Less time window
- Mock exam one day before
- CLAT had minus marking for wrong answer but NLAT has minus marking for question not answered

#SupremeCourt
Nayyar: This cannot be a revolving door that people can walk in and walk out.

(Nayyar concludes)
Senior Counsel Gopal Sankaranarayanan makes brief rejoinder submissions.

Supreme Court asks parties to submit their written notes if required.

Judgment reserved, to be delivered on Monday, September 21.

#SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020
[Breaking] NLAT 2020: Candidates who engaged in malpractices have been disqualified, NLSIU submits; Supreme Court reserves verdict #SupremeCourt #NLAT2020 #CLAT2020 @NLSIUofficial

bit.ly/2H9CMXz
Challenge to conduct of NLAT for NLSIU admissions 2020: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 3]
#NLSIU @NLSIUofficial #NLAT
barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @barandbench

Apr 17
Supreme Court to hear today plea by INC leader Pawan Khera challenging its stay on the transit anticipatory bail granted to him by the Telangana High Court in a forgery and criminal conspiracy case

Bench: Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar Image
The top court had stayed the relief granted to Khera by the High Court on April 15.

Read 👇

barandbench.com/news/supreme-c…
SG Tushar Mehta (for Assam): there are new pleadings in the application.

Sr. Adv. AM Singhvi (for Khera): your lordships have been persuaded to pass an ex parte order. It’s a transit bail. It expires today. The court opens on Monday.

Court: see the document on page number 98. This document (Aadhar) you filed. On the basis of this document you are saying your address is different…

Singhvi: I am asking only for transit bail to be extended to Tuesday.

Court: why in Telangana? Why not in Assam?

Singhvi: I want transit bail till Tuesday so I can approach Assam. Telangana petition was filed in a hurry. In the arguments it was pointed out and a correct document was filed. My wife is an MLA candidate in Telangana. Her affidavit was filed on the same day. That is not pointed out. 100 police men are sent to Nizamuddin. There’s article 21 in this country. He doesn’t tell you that the correct document has been filed. This is all prejudice.
Read 7 tweets
Apr 17
DAY 5: Supreme Court nine-judge bench to resume hearing reference arising from Sabarimala review pleas

Parties opposing the reference to continue submissions today
#Sabarimala #SupremeCourt Image
Adv MR Venkatesh appears for Atmatam Trust
#Sabarimala
Adv MR Venkatesh: My Lords, the first thing I would like to say is that the word religion in Article 25, religious practice in Article 25(2)(a), Hindu religious institutions under Article 25(2)(b), religious denomination under Article 26, and matters of religion under Article 26(2)(b), are all indeterminate and probably incapable of being defined. The word denomination, for instance, can be traced to the word denominatio in the Latin language, fortified by medieval Christianity, which allows the word denomination to be rooted to a particular denomination within the Christian religion, and it was picked up by the Irish Constitution, and we have adopted it.

So it has huge foreign roots, and to this extent these words have their own limitations in terms of our understanding. What gets compounded is that while Articles 25 to 28 have the roots of Article 44 of the Irish Constitution, Article 25(2)(a) in the way it is being read, and Article 25(2)(b), have no international precision. In that sense, Article 25(2)(a) and Article 25(2)(b) are sui generis and are rooted in Indian conditions, tailor made for certain Indian conditions. This requires interpretation and proper intervention of this Court.

Moreover, if there is a definition for denominational temples and a certain class of temples falls into denominational temples, then what happens to non denominational temples. Do they have no rights. Do they have no protection under the Constitution. And how do we deal with non denominational temples. The way it has been interpreted by law, and I will demonstrate very shortly, the problem is that all this becomes a sort of public place, which is equated to a car, railway station or a bus stand, where anybody can enter and anybody can leave.

And then it would seem that the Jehovah Witness case has been relied upon heavily in the formulation of Article 25. Originally proponents of what I would say is the doctrine under Article 25(1), which deals only with what I would say is that even on a mere reading, as Mr Sundaraman pointed out, it should shock the conscience of the Court.
Read 50 tweets
Apr 16
Bombay High Court hearing Anil Ambani's suit against Republic TV, its editor Arnab Goswami, and others asks why the matter can't be resolved.

Court: Why can't this entire matter be resolved? Why must a truth like this lie? I mean, putting egos and tempers and all aside.

@republic #BombayHighCourt #AnilAmbaniImage
Adv Mayur Khandeparkar for Ambani: In fact, when this matter was last opened for the previous bench, the previous bench said the most aptly that nobody is taking away your right..

Court: It's always very comforting for a judge to be told that the previous bench said the most aptly... (laughs)

Khandeparkar: The phrase was 'no hitting below the belt'. Nobody is taking away the journalistic freedom of reporting an aspect, as a matter of fact. But to use words like, 'I am some kind of a fraudster, calling me stupid'... All kinds of words and adjectives that don't come within the ambit of journalistic freedom. Nobody is stopping you from projecting an instance.

#BombayHighCourt
Sr Adv Mahesh Jethmalani for Republic: I'll justify each and every statement that I have made. My defense is one of justification and fair comment. There is nothing I have said which is disparaging. I have gone by the record.

Court: There are orders of the court calling the plaintiff a fraudster?

Jethmalani: Yes. They have gone in appeal. They restricted that challenge to the fraudster business only to the penalty amount and not under the binding case.

Court: Also, the manner in which this is conveyed is also crucial. To wave your finger and call someone a fraudster or to report.. There is a fine line. So really, if both maintain a balance and maintain decorum... There are two matters of defamation similar. Temporarily, things flare up. Things do get heated, get out of control. But there is a manner in which things are done.
Read 11 tweets
Apr 15
Former Supreme Court judge Justice Abhay S Oka to shortly speak on: Robes cannot be Rented

Organised by Adhivakta Parishad Supreme Court Unit

#SupremeCourt Image
Justice Abhay S. Oka: When one becomes a judge of a court, any court, and in particular High Court and Supreme Court, apart from Bangalore Principles, apart from any other written norms, the judges are bound by several constraints and restrictions.
Obviously, all those restrictions come in for the purpose of maintaining dignity of the office and upholding the old principles that justice should not only be done, but it should be manifestly seen to be done.
And whether Bangalore Principles or not, we are bound by those constraints.
Justice AS Oka: For example, if as a sitting judge, I was invited by Adhivakta Parishad to speak on its platform, I would have politely said no because my belief was Adhivakta Parishad does have political inclinations.
When a judge demits office, of course, he is not bound by those strict constraints and restrictions which he had as a judge, but I personally believe that being a retired judge of the constitutional court, he must follow certain restraints and constraints. @AdhivaktaP
Read 16 tweets
Apr 15
Supreme Court to hear today plea filed by Assam government challenging the transit anticipatory bail granted to INC leader Pawan Khera in a forgery and criminal conspiracy case

Bench: Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar Image
The case was registered against Khera following his recent claims that Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s wife Riniki Bhuyan holds multiple foreign passports and undisclosed assets abroad.

Read 👇

barandbench.com/news/litigatio…
SG Tushar Mehta (for Assam): it’s a case of patent lack of territorial jurisdiction. No averment in the petition why telangana high court. Offence committed in Assam, FIR in Assam. Neither he says why Telangana.

Court: he is saying petitioner wife is staying in Hyderabad.

Mehta: he places on record Aadhar card in page 98 where wife is staying in Delhi. He places both. Which shows even his wife stays in Delhi. Sometimes he keeps travelling. Is this the law? Someone can buy or rent 10 properties in 10 different states. This will qualify as forum choosing. This is abuse of law.
Read 5 tweets
Apr 15
#Breaking

"Direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest."

Arvind Kejriwal files an affidavit in the Delhi HC stating that since Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma's children are panel counsel for the Central government, she should recuse from the excise policy case.
@AamAadmiParty

@ArvindKejriwal
@CBIHeadquartersImage
Kejriwal says that since Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appears for CBI in the excise policy case, and he also allocates cases to the panel counsel, this gives rise to a "direct and serious appearance of conflict of interest".
Kejriwal has also raised objections to his not being given an opportunity to make a rejoinder submission in his recusal application.

He says that he left the Court at around 3:45 PM after seeking leave of the Court and had no reason to expect the matter would continue substantially beyond the court hours.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(