1

In the High Court of Judicature for

Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur
ORDER
1. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.7970/2015
Rashi Mangal Vs. Union of India & Anr.
2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8480/2015
Suhel Qureshi Vs. Union of India & Anr.
Date of Order :

7.7.2015

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

Mr. Dinesh Yadav for the petitioners
Mr. R.D. Rastogi- Addl. Solicitor General
with Mr. Ashish Tiwari for the respondent
No. 1- Union of India
Mr. R.N. Mathur Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Prateek Mathur for the respondent No.2

On the matters coming to this Court

it has transpired that Hon'ble Bombay High
Court

in

jurisdiction

its

ordinary

(lodging)

No.

civil

writ

1984/2015

has

directed as under:
a)
Respondent
No.1-CLAT
to
appoint
an
Expert
Panel
/
Committee, as early as possible,
preferably within 5 days from today
and refer 7 objections/ questions
or other connected issues, for
clarification / explanation, for
their consideration immediately.
b)
The Expert Panel/ Committee
to clarify and / or take decision
with reasons on all the objections/
questions, as recorded within 4
days thereafter, by following the
due process of law.
c)
The Expert Panel/ Committee
to take effective decision and
actions for re-preparing and /or
revising
the
merit
list
of

candidates, if necessary, (CLAT-15)

after
re-valuation
and/
or
assessment, if required, or pass or
declare such results / merit list
immediately,
within
4
days
thereafter.
d)
It
is
made
clear
that
(CLAT-2015), the whole merit list
and all subsequent process, will be
subject to outcome of the Expert
Panel/
Committee's
decision,
so
referred above, which will be taken
as early as possible by all the
concerned, to avoid further delay
of any kind.
Counsel

for

the

respondent

No.2-

Convener of CLAT-2015 has stated that in the

event

the

petitioners

were

to

make

representation with regard to the questions/

answers

of

CLAT-2015

of

which

they

are

aggrieved and for which the writ petitions

have been filed, the Convener would make a
reference of the said questions / answers to
the Expert Committee appointed by the Bombay
High Court.
Mr. Dinesh Yadav appearing for the
petitioners
questions

submits
of

which

that
the

aside

of

the

petitioners

are

aggrieved, as detailed in the petitions, in

the course of hearing it has transpired that
various

other

questions

either

wrongly

in

formulated

CLAT-2015
or

were

wrongly

answered as indicated in the final answer

key. It has been submitted that 15 questions
in issue have now been reflected in Annex.12
filed with the additional affidavit.
Heard
parties.

learned

counsel

for

the

I am of the considered view that as

the

matter

CLAT-213

with

has

regard

been

to

finally

errors

in

the

adjudicated

on

2.7.2015 by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court,

referred to above and the matter referred to
an Expert Committee, it would be appropriate
as

submitted

respondent
the

by

No.2

petitioners

the

counsel

Convener
also

for

the

(CLAT-2015)

that

forthwith

file

their

representation/s before the respondent No.2Convener on the issue of their aggrievement

with the said examination. The Convener is
thereon directed to make reference of the
representation/s

to

the

Expert

Committee

appointed by the Bombay High Court in the

light of its
The

Judgment dated 2.7.2015.

petitions

stand

disposed

of

accordingly.
The Registry is directed to place a
copy

of

this

order

in

the

connected

petition.

Sharma NK

(ALOK SHARMA), J

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been

incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.
NK Sharma, Sr.P.A