The Delhi High Court recently considered a petition challenging the decision of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) to adopt CLAT-PG scores as the sole criterion for recruiting lawyers. During the proceedings, the NHAI informed the court that it was prepared to reconsider this decision and had already extended the application deadline for candidates.
The matter arose from a public interest litigation filed by advocate Shannu Baghel, who questioned the validity of the NHAI notification issued on August 11. The notification required applicants seeking positions as legal professionals in the authority to rely exclusively on their CLAT-PG scores. Baghel argued before the court that such a criterion was irrational and arbitrary, as the CLAT-PG examination is designed to evaluate law graduates for admission into postgraduate programs such as the LL.M., and not for recruitment into legal positions in public institutions. He emphasized that the test measures academic eligibility rather than practical professional competence, which is essential for public service roles.
The case was heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice D. K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. During the hearing, NHAI’s counsel informed the bench that the authority was actively considering whether to revisit its decision and would examine the issues raised in the petition. It was further submitted that the deadline for applications, which was originally fixed earlier, had been extended until September 25. This extension, according to the authority, was aimed at ensuring fairness and accommodating applicants in light of the ongoing legal challenge.
The petitioner stressed that the adoption of CLAT-PG scores as a recruitment filter had no rational nexus with the requirements of the job. He contended that recruitment in the legal services of a statutory body should be based on a broader and more practical assessment of candidates’ legal skills and professional aptitude, not merely on academic performance in an entrance examination. The petition highlighted the constitutional principles of fairness and reasonableness in public employment, insisting that these were undermined by the impugned notification.
Recognizing the importance of the issue, the High Court placed the matter for further hearing on September 18 and directed that it be given priority. The court’s decision to keep the matter “high on board” reflected the urgency and significance it attached to the concerns raised about transparency and fairness in public sector recruitment practices.
The case, titled Shannu Baghel v. Union of India & Anr., thus centers on the question of whether NHAI can restrict its recruitment to CLAT-PG scores alone, or whether such a policy would be legally unsustainable and arbitrary. With NHAI signaling its willingness to reconsider its policy and extend deadlines, and with the High Court scheduling an expedited hearing, the matter remains under judicial scrutiny and is expected to set an important precedent in the field of public employment policies.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.