The Allahabad High Court has ordered the Consortium of NLUs to revise the CLAT 2026 merit list in an answer key dispute. On February 3, 2026, a single bench judge of Justice Vivek Saran J, the Allahabad HC delivered its judgment in the legal battle between Avneesh Gupta (Minor) vs. Consortium of National Law Universities. In his petition, Gupta alleged that the Consortium of NLUs did not consider three of his objections in the CLAT 2026 final answer key. Meanwhile, the Consortium of NLUs argued that its headquarters were situated in Karnataka, and this does not come under the Allahabad HC’s jurisdiction. On the other hand, the Allahabad HC noted that the exam was held in Ghaziabad and the court held its jurisdiction under Article 26.
Category | Details from Judgment |
Case Title | Avneesh Gupta (Minor) vs. Consortium of National Law Universities |
Court | High Court of Judicature at Allahabad |
Judgment Delivered On | February 3, 2026 |
Writ Petition No. | WRIT-C No. 45517 of 2025 |
Judicial Officer | Hon’ble Vivek Saran, J. |
Petitioner | Avneesh Gupta (Minor) |
Respondent | Consortium of National Law Universities |
Petitioner’s Counsel | In Person |
Respondent’s Counsel | Avneesh Tripathi |
In his petition to the Allahabad HC, petitioner Avneesh Gupta sought relief described in five points. The petitioner sought relief, alleging that the Consortium of NLUs did not consider three objections he filed in the final answer key. Here are the reliefs that the petitioner sought from the Allahabad HC:
Writ directing the respondent to withdraw the incorrect questions in the CLAT exam 2026 .
Award appropriate marks for those questions and modify the petitioner’s rank in the CLAT 2026 merit list.
Issue a writ to review objections properly.
Issue direction to publish the corrected merit list and rank list.
Recalculate the petitioner’s marks as per the corrected answer key.
The petitioner, Avneesh Gupta, argued that the rejection of three of his objections was invalid. Gupta argued that despite the Expert Committee supporting his answers, the final answer key did not reflect the corrections. This action of the Consortium of the NLUs led to his rank going down and hampered his admission chances.
While the case was being heard in the Allahabad HC, both parties argued through their respective counsels. The Consortium of NLUs initially argued that since its headquarters were located in Karnataka, this case did not come under the jurisdiction of the Allahabad HC. The Allahabad HC under Article 26 came under its jurisdiction since the exam was held in Ghaziabad. Furthermore, the Consortium argued that the valuation and correctness of questions lie within the expert domain, and the court should not re-evaluate exam answers. The High Court agreed to this, but said there was a procedural infirmity.
The following questions were objected to by the petitioner, and the expert committee made the following observations:
Question No. (Booklet-C) | Expert Committee Opinion | Oversight Committee Decision |
6 | Option ‘B’ is correct | Not altered |
9 | Both options ‘B’ & ‘D’ correct | Oversight Committee retained only ‘B’ without reasons |
13 | Option ‘C’ is correct | Not altered |
In its judgment, the Allahabad HC directed the Consortium of NLUs to revise the CLAT 2026 merit list. The detailed judgment read, “In such view of the matter, the respondent directed to revise the merit list by awarding marks against question no. 9 of booklet-C (corresponding to question no. 91 of booklet-A) and to all other questions which correspond to the same in.”
“In absence of any reason been given for overruling the decision of the Expert Committee by the Oversight Committee with respect to question no. 91 of booklet-A (correspond to question no. 9 of bookletC), the same is hereby quashed and the answers of the Expert Committee are sustained.”
The court further ordered that no changes be made in the admissions already done. However, the Consortium of NLUs must consider the revised merit list for further admission process.
On Question asked by student community
Hi,
If you're sure that you want to pursue law, then CLAT is generally the better option. It is the gateway to most National Law Universities (NLUs), which are among the top law colleges in India.
However, CUET is also worth considering as it can help you get admission to
Hello Komal,
Here are the links to the CLAT Exam previous year question papers.
Hello Banju,
You can download the CLAT 2021 question paper with solutions from the link below:
https://law.careers360.com/articles/clat-2021-question-paper-with-solution
Hello Dear Student,
With a CLAT PG rank of 4649 and CUET PG score of 106 , getting top NLUs or central universities may be difficult. However, you still have good options for pursuing an LLM in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) at private and state-affiliated universities.
Some suitable options include:
Hello Dear Student,
You should prepare for CLAT if your goal is to get admission into a top National Law University (NLU) for a 5-year integrated law course like BA LLB or BBA LLB.
You should choose CUET UG if you want admission into:
Among top 100 Universities Globally in the Times Higher Education (THE) Interdisciplinary Science Rankings 2026
Ranked #1 Law School in India & South Asia by QS- World University Rankings | Merit cum means scholarships | Applications Closing Soon
Excellent curriculum; an impressive range of electives, besides core law courses. Up to 100% merit scholarship on a first-come, first-served basis
In-house judicial coaching | Proven success in National Moot Court Competitions
North India's Largest Educational Group | NIRF Ranked 87 | NAAC A+ Grade | Highest Package 1.6 Cr | Application Closing Soon
Admissions open for B.A. LL.B. (Hons.), B.B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) and LL.B Program (3 Years) | School of Law, MRU ranked No. 1 in Law Schools of Excellence in India by GHRDC (2023)