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

Jun 8
"Delhi will choke. God save us all if this is how you want Delhi to live."

Delhi High Court makes strong remarks over the Central government's plans to take over properties in the Lutyen's Delhi area, including the Delhi Gymkhana Club and the Polo Ground.

#DelhiGymkhanaClub Image
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the remarks while hearing a plea filed by the Indian Polo Association over the government's eviction notice.
The Court said that green spaces in Delhi were anyways scarce and the "little green space" remaining in the NDMC area is also being taken over.

The Court questioned if the government is plannig to make high rises in the area.

"Little breather we have in the NDMC area is also gonna go and all of us are going to suffocate and die," the Bench remarked.
Read 5 tweets
Jun 8
#Breaking
“It’s not a small matter and not a standalone case.”

Delhi High Court orders removal of videos on social media platforms calling a sitting High Court judge "murderer" and blaming him for the death of 6 people in a building collapse in Saket on May 30.

Court passed the order after Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) filed a criminal contempt petition.

#Contempt #CriminalContemptImage
The videos were uploaded by a person named Dr Kapil Kakar, who claims to be a psychologist and social activist.

He is also stated to be the maker of a series called 'Black Justice'.
A Division Bench of Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Madhu Jain passed the order.

The Court examined the videos and stated that instances like these were becoming very regular and coming regularly.
Read 4 tweets
May 29
Ceremonial bench to commence shortly on the last working day of Justices JK Maheshwari and Pankaj Mithal
#SupremeCourt Image
CJI: this is like a ceremonial constitution bench. (Smiles)

AG R Venkataramani: Most judges are regarded for compassion and creativity....the two judges are no exception.
SG Mehta: I have never seen his Lordships without a smile on their face. In Justice Maheswari we found an elderly friend who always helped us. Justice Mithal's court always had a warm and conducive environment..

Sr Adv Mukul Rohatgi: I appeared before Justice Mithal before AP HC and it seems like 6 months ago. But it has been 5 years. Other day Justice Mithal why are you here and not a junior. I like that. Your Lordships retire in pink of health. 65 is not a retirement age. Now we have to get used to the new lot which is coming now. It will take another 6 months.
Read 13 tweets
May 29
NEET UG Paper Leak: Supreme Court to shortly hear pleas by various stakeholders seeking measures ranging from replacing the NTA to shifting NEET entirely to a computer-based format

Bench: Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe

#NEET2026 Image
SG Tushar Mehta: as directed, we have filed an affidavit. It’s filed by Dr. Radhakrishnan. He headed the commitee. The recommendations, suggestions etc. were to be implemented this year.

Court: we want to ask, you originally were part of the expert commitee, how much of monitoring has happened about the implementation? How did this failure occur? Despite your monitoring on the basis of HPC recommendation, if this incident has happened, then there would be a problem with the recommendation. Or the monitoring may not have happened.

Radhakrishnan: we had recommended 60 suggestions. In the first 60, mostly they have been implemented. A few are still in the process. In 2025 NEET UG was conducted satisfactorily. There were incidents of power failures in some centres, otherwise the recommendations were implemented and it worked.
Radhakrishnan: there are two areas, the first thing we have done is involvement of all state governments and district admin for secured conducting of the test.

Court: what was not in contemplation of the HPC that lead to this?

Radhakrishnan: certain practices are under implementation. At the moment these are being taken care of for the Reexamination on May 21.

Court: monitoring commitee meets regularly?

Radhakrishnan: yes. Our target is to ensure reforms are implemented.

Court: the real problem won’t stop till actual accountability arises. Not in terms of so and so will be liable, it will be effective when we know which individual shoulders the responsibility lies. Unless you identify the duty holders it will be a diffused obligation.

SG Mehta: the buck must stop somewhere.

Court: unless we identify the responsibility. If something goes wrong, we don’t know. It is a most sensitive situation.

Mehta: Government is concerned about youth.

Court: you need to learn from other institutions.

Mehta: some new mechanisms are put in place for 21st examinations. It may not be appropriate to divulge what’s there. Otherwise it may defeat the purpose.

Court: Is there a regular office who conduct it? With institutional memory?

Mehta: the NTA is having institutional memory. But it does not have domain experts. We have got experts from the IIT system etc. they have been brought into the system.
Read 7 tweets
May 29
[Regarding persistent delay in pronouncement of judgments by several high courts]

CJI Surya Kant: Amicus had filed four volume reports before this court compiling High Court wise data before us. All suggestions from HCs were also compiled for uniform judicial guidelines. We are of the view that this is a fit case under Article 142 for our intervention to pass uniform guidelines.Image
#BREAKING CJI: 1. A matter where judgment is reserved, judgment to be pronounced within 3 months of reserving. Faster decisions in matters of personal liberty etc.

2. Bail application orders ideally within next day and if reserved then decision next day

3. Bail orders to be communicated to jail authorities

4. Undertrial to be released same day of bail or maximum the next day.

5. The trial court to inform HC of compliance.
CJI: 6. operative part to be announced in court and reasons to be uploaded within 7 days. Cases such as habeas corpus, demolition etc.

7. Necessary changes to be made to the HC website by the Chief justice of the respective high courts.
Read 9 tweets
May 27
[SIR JUDGMENT SUMMARISED]
Thread 👇

Supreme Court recognises Election Commission’s power to conduct Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act, while upholding the Bihar SIR.

The Court says EC can undertake a limited electoral inquiry into citizenship, but cannot finally determine citizenship. Deleted persons must be referred to the competent authority under the Citizenship Act #SIR #supremecourt @ECISVEEPImage
Judgment in a nutshell👇

• Supreme Court holds that the Election Commission has power to conduct Special Intensive Revision under Article 324 and Section 21(3) of the RP Act.

• The ruling arises from the Bihar SIR, but the legal principle laid down concerns the EC’s broader power to undertake SIR exercises.

• Court says SIR is a special statutory mechanism distinct from ordinary revision under Section 21(2) and Rule 25.

• Bench holds that free and fair elections depend on the integrity, accuracy and credibility of electoral rolls.

• Court finds the Bihar SIR was backed by legitimate constitutional purpose and was not merely an administrative exercise.

• SC holds that the SIR framework satisfies proportionality, given the safeguards of notice, hearing, objections, speaking orders and appeal.

• Court says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption of validity, not an absolute bar on verification.

• EC can examine citizenship only for deciding inclusion or exclusion from electoral rolls, not to finally declare citizenship status.

• Deletion on citizenship doubts does not mean the person is declared a non citizen. Final adjudication lies with authorities under the Citizenship Act.

• EC must refer persons deleted from the 2003 Bihar roll on citizenship grounds to the competent authority within four weeks.
[What favours the petitioners in the Supreme Court’s Bihar SIR ruling]

• Court clarifies EC cannot finally determine citizenship and its findings are confined only to electoral consequences.

• SC says inclusion in electoral rolls creates a rebuttable presumption in favour of existing electors.

• Bench directs that persons deleted on citizenship grounds must be referred to competent authorities under the Citizenship Act within 4 weeks.

• Court emphasises notice, hearing, speaking orders, appeals and judicial review as mandatory safeguards against arbitrary exclusion.
Read 4 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!

:(