The Delhi High Court on Thursday stayed the National Highways Authority of India’s (NHAI) decision to recruit lawyers based on their Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) PG scores, questioning the logic behind using an academic entrance test as a recruitment benchmark.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed the interim order while hearing a petition that challenged the NHAI’s notification making CLAT PG marks the basis for hiring legal professionals.
The bench observed that the use of CLAT PG scores — an exam designed for admission to postgraduate law programmes — had “no rationale” in determining employability.
“We are concerned with the rationale. What is the nexus? You test them on credibility. The purpose of CLAT PG is for LLM. You cannot say that the persons who have set the paper have the acumen for evaluating for that purpose. You are not really testing if he will be a good staff,” the court remarked.
It further noted that recruitment standards for professional employment should not be conflated with academic eligibility.
“Somebody may be employable, somebody may be better to pursue higher studies. Why is this at all a component? How do you make this an eligibility criteria without which one cannot even participate?” the bench asked.
Defending the decision, NHAI’s counsel argued that CLAT PG scores served as a reasonable benchmark to assess legal acumen. He added that the authority also considered professional experience, citing a column in the application form specifically seeking details of contractual work.
However, the court dismissed this justification, stating: “This is no reason at all. We are not impressed by that. Till pronouncement, you will not proceed with selection. Any amount of explaining will not do perhaps.”
The bench also flagged concerns that prestigious institutions like National Law University Delhi, which ranked second in the National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF), do not participate in CLAT PG, thereby excluding otherwise eligible candidates.
“Why is not such a qualification included here? Somebody may not even be interested in taking NLUs,” the court observed.
The judges also recalled that an earlier bench had suggested entrusting the recruitment process to the bar association. Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, however, opposed the idea, saying, “Bar association has to answer that. It can’t be an employment benchmark.”
Reserving its order, the bench directed that NHAI shall not proceed further with its recruitment advertisement until the judgment is pronounced.
