https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459989 Admission policy at NLSIU could not be altered unilaterally: the separate admission notification required Academic Council recommendation, and the Executive Council could not change the mode of admission on its own. As a Consortium member, NLSIU was bound to admit students through CLAT 2020 and could not depart from the common admission framework for the relevant academic year. The proposed home-proctored NLAT was found to lack transparency because the short notice and technological requirements risked excluding eligible candidates and undermined fairness under Article 14. The separate admission process was therefore not sustainable, and admissions were to proceed through CLAT 2020. en-us Mon, 21 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jan 2025 19:56:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459989 Admission policy at NLSIU could not be altered unilaterally: the separate admission notification required Academic Council recommendation, and the Executive Council could not change the mode of admission on its own. As a Consortium member, NLSIU was bound to admit students through CLAT 2020 and could not depart from the common admission framework for the relevant academic year. The proposed home-proctored NLAT was found to lack transparency because the short notice and technological requirements risked excluding eligible candidates and undermined fairness under Article 14. The separate admission process was therefore not sustainable, and admissions were to proceed through CLAT 2020. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 21 Sep 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459989