Back
B. R. GAVAI, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Siddhi Sandeep Ladda – Appellant
Versus
Consortium Of National Law Universities – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. emphasis on the importance of fair examination practices and accountability. (Para 1) |
| 2. overview of appeals (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. critique on clat question framing (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. committee formed for clat scrutiny (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. court's role in academic matters (Para 8 , 9) |
| 6. questions and answers related to environmental protection (Para 10 , 12 , 20 , 22) |
| 7. consideration of void and voidable agreements (Para 23 , 25 , 30 , 32) |
| 8. wage disparities and omission of questions (Para 39 , 44 , 52 , 56) |
| 9. final directions and order (Para 58 , 59 , 60) |
JUDGMENT :
B.R. GAVAI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals take exception to the judgment and final order in LPA No.1250 of 2024 dated 23rd April 2025 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, “High Court”). The Division Bench of the High Court was seized of the Letter Patents Appeals which were filed challenging the judgment and final order dated 20th December 2024 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court as well as a batch of Writ Petitions which were filed across various High Courts and which had been transferred to it by this Court.
3. We have heard Shri K.K. Venug
In academic matters, courts may intervene to rectify improperly framed examination questions affecting candidate assessment and maintain fairness in evaluation processes.
The court emphasized the need for restraint in challenging key answers and the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in recruitment disputes.
Judicial review of examination answer keys is permitted only when keys are demonstrably unconstitutional, ensuring fair promotion processes for candidates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the statutory right conferred by Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of the 1971 Rules, which guarantees parity in wages and benefits to contract labours engaged with....
The Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner has jurisdiction to determine wage parity for contract workers performing similar work as regular employees under Rule 25(2)(v)(a) of the CL (R & A) Central Rules....
The High Court must not entertain recruitment disputes when a Tribunal has jurisdiction, emphasizing the principle of alternative remedy in administrative matters per the Administrative Tribunals Act....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
