Arnab Roy vs Consortium of National Law Universities

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(SC) 725

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J B PARDIWALA
Arnab Roy – Appellant
Versus
Consortium of National Law Universities – Respondent

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Nikhil Nayyar, Sr. Adv., Mr. N. Sai Vinod, AOR, Mr. Abhinav, Adv., By Courts Motion, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv., Mr. Arun Sri Kumar, Adv., Ms. Pritha Srikumar, AOR, Mr. Anirudh G., Adv., Ms. Arshiya Ghose, Adv., Mrs. Lalita Kaushik, AOR,Mrs. Aishwarya Bhati, A.S.G., Mr. Aman Sharma, Adv., Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, Adv., Mr. Manvinder Singh Rathore, Adv., Mr. Manvendra Singh Rathore, Adv., Mr. Shashwat Parihar, Adv., Mr. Shaswat Parihar, Adv., Mr. Amrish Kumar, AOR, Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR

JUDGMENT :

Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.

1. The petitioner who is a lawyer and disability rights activist moved these proceedings under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for challenging certain conditions which were imposed for the conduct of the Common Law Admission Test 2023¹[“CLAT”]. CLAT was scheduled on 18 December 2022. The issue specifically addressed by the petitioner relates to the facilities for candidates who intend to avail of a scribe.

2. The petitioner avers that he was personally aware that at least 13 visually impaired candidates would be denied the assistance of a scribe because of the conditions belatedly imposed by the Consortium of National Law Universities²[“Consortium”] less than four weeks before the date of the examination.

3. The petitioner has highlighted certain specific concerns, based on the decision of this Court in Vikash Kumar Vs Union Public Service Commission & Ors., (2021) 5 SCC 370. The first among these concerns is that the Consortium has denied the right to a scribe to candidates who do not have a benchmark disability though they have a genuine difficulty in writing. In this context, reliance has been placed on the following principle which

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2023 Supreme(SC) 725

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J B PARDIWALAArnab Roy – AppellantVersusConsortium of National Law Universities – Respondent

Cases Referred (1)

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J B PARDIWALA
Arnab Roy – Appellant
Versus
Consortium of National Law Universities – Respondent