The Delhi High Court is set to hear on September 8 a petition challenging the National Highways Authority of India’s decision to use CLAT-PG scores as a qualifying criterion for hiring legal professionals.
A division bench led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela had a preliminary hearing on the matter earlier and granted the NHAI’s legal team additional time to consult with the concerned authorities. The case has now been listed for further arguments on Monday.
Petitioner Says CLAT-PG Meant For Academics, Not Jobs
The petition was filed by Shannu Bahgel, a practising advocate, who questioned the legality and rationale of the NHAI’s August 11 notification. The notification announced the recruitment of 44 young legal professionals based solely on their performance in CLAT-PG 2022 and subsequent editions.
According to Bahgel, the Common Law Admission Test for Postgraduates (CLAT-PG) is designed exclusively to assess candidates’ eligibility for admission to master’s-level law programs, and not for public sector job recruitment.
“There does not appear to be any reasonable or rational nexus between the objects sought to be achieved and the basis of preparation of merit for such selection,” the plea stated.
Recruitment Criteria Called ‘Arbitrary & Irrational’
The petition claims that the selection process violates principles of equality by excluding thousands of eligible law graduates and practising lawyers who may not have taken the CLAT-PG in the specified years.
“The recruitment is restricted only to candidates who appeared in CLAT 2022 and onward PG, ignoring all other law graduates and practising advocates who are otherwise fully qualified,” the plea argued.
Bahgel contends that public employment should be based on open and competitive processes and not tied to academic entrance tests with unrelated objectives.
Court Questions Logic Behind CLAT-PG As Employment Filter
During the initial hearing, the bench made an oral observation highlighting the original intent of the CLAT-PG exam — to assess merit for postgraduate legal studies, not for professional hiring. The judges appeared to question the justification for repurposing an academic test for job recruitment.
In response, the NHAI’s counsel asked for more time to seek official instructions on the matter before presenting a formal defense.
Larger Implications Ahead
This case may set a precedent for how government agencies leverage academic exams for employment, especially when those exams were not designed to evaluate professional aptitude or job readiness. The outcome could impact future hiring frameworks across public institutions that seek to streamline recruitment through standardized tests.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, International
