Despite receiving thousands of objections from students regarding technical glitches in the Common Law Admission Test 2020 that was held last month, the Consortium of National Law Universities on Saturday said that not a single complaint was valid.
Candidates, however, have questioned how the consortium reviewed thousands of complaints in a span of three days. Sources said that over 40,000 objections were raised. The consortium refused to confirm the number, though admitted that it ran into several thousands.
In a release it said that the expert committee had “randomly” examined the audit log of the number of candidates who had raised objections to the response sheet, and did not find any discrepancy between the two. “The audit log showed that one candidate had changed the response as many six times and the system recorded the 6th and the final response. Thus the apprehension that earlier response was not changed has no basis,” the release said.
Candidates whom The Hindu spoke to are not satisfied with the consortium’s response and state that the answers they had chosen and submitted while writing the online test were different from what had been finally marked. For instance, if a candidate had chosen option ‘c’ in the test, in the answer sheet, he or she has been graded for option ‘b’.
A candidate who raised an objection said, “Candidates are sure of the options they have marked and the consortium has ruined the prospects of meritorious students to get into these prestigious universities.” Another candidate, while demanding a retest, claimed that a bug in the software caused errors in her answer sheet. Still others allege that there were a range of problems which included questions being asked from out of the syllabus.
The expert committee stated that the service provider who helped in the conduct of the test has a track record of successfully conducting various national level tests. “The audit trail of each candidate is the most authentic evidence of every click and mouse movement, in case of a dispute, service provider shall make available to the court the audit trail of the concerned candidate,” said Faizan Mustafa, Vice-Chancellor of NALSAR University of Law (NALSAR), Hyderabad, and permanent member of the governing body of the Consortium said.
From next year, candidates with grievances to be charged
While denying that there were errors on the part of the consortium in conducting the test, a committee which was set up to look into the grievances noted that a large number of unnecessary objections were filed because they do not charge students to raise objections.
“CLAT-2020 had made filing of objections absolutely free and therefore the number of objections filed was so high. On the expert committee’s recommendation, the executive committee and governing body of the consortium have resolved that from next year a fee would be imposed for the filing of objections and if the objection is accepted, the fee paid should be refunded,” the consortium in the release said.
Three questions for UG exam and one PG examination dropped in CLAT
Controversy continues to dog the Common Law Admission Test 2020 that was held last month. The Consortium of National Law Universities, on Saturday, announced that three questions in the undergraduate CLAT examination and one question in the PG CLAT have been dropped. Students will not be graded on these questions.
The consortium said that answer keys of four questions have been changed - one each in English and Current Affairs including GK and two in Quantitative Techniques. “The expert committee did not recommend any change in Legal Reasoning and Logical Reasoning. Similarly, no change will be there in the PG examination key,” the press release said.
CLAT-2020, which is the entrance test for admissions into 22 National Law Universities across the country, was held on September 28. A total of 78 percent of 75,183 candidates who had registered for the test appeared for the test.
Several candidates had also claimed that they were denied the use of a calculator in the CLAT 2020, while it was allowed in the mock. The consortium has said that the calculator was provided in the mocks without the approval of CLAT Convener or the Executive Committee of the CLAT 2020. It added that candidates were duly informed about the non-availability of calculators prior to the test.
