The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ruled that scores of the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) PG cannot be used as a criterion for offering public employment.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that the eligibility criteria for pursuing higher education and the standards for assessing suitability for public employment are distinct and cannot be equated.

“Suitability for public employment may demand certain qualities which may or may not be necessarily required to be fulfilled by a candidate who is desirous of pursuing higher studies,” the Court noted.

The Bench further stated that even if the CLAT PG syllabus covers various substantive and procedural laws, it does not justify using the scores for employment purposes.

The observations were made while allowing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging a National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) notification dated August 11, which proposed to use CLAT PG scores as the basis for recruiting lawyers.

The Court noted that the reasons cited by NHAI for adopting CLAT PG scores did not hold legal justification. While CLAT PG is nationally recognized for admission to postgraduate law courses, it is not designed as a tool for public employment selection.

The Bench also emphasized that adoption of CLAT PG scores by other public sector undertakings or organizations cannot serve as a legal basis for NHAI to prescribe similar recruitment criteria.

“Prescription relating to recruitment criteria of NHAI on the basis of merit in CLAT PG score did not have any rational basis, lacked logical nexus with the objective sought to be achieved, and is hit by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution,” the Court said.

The Court further pointed out that universities often have different selection methods for postgraduate law programs, such as written examinations, interviews, or assessing bachelor’s degree marks, and relying solely on CLAT PG scores could discriminate against candidates who do not appear for CLAT PG but qualify under other recognized procedures.

“In view of the discussions above, we are fully convinced that the impugned recruitment criteria, where selection for the post is to be made on the basis of merit in CLAT PG score – 2022 onwards, is legally untenable, being hit by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India,” the Court concluded.

The PIL was filed by lawyer Shannu Baghel, contending that CLAT PG is conducted solely to assess merit for admission to postgraduate law courses, and its scores cannot be used as a basis for public employment.

Case Title: Shannu Baghel v. Union of India & Anr