"List before Delhi High Court on March 3. Within 7 days of this order registrar of each High Court should send the papers (of the concerned case pending before them) to Delhi High Court," the Supreme Court directed.

On December 20, Justice Jyoti Singh of the Delhi High Court, sitting as a single judge, partly allowed a plea filed by 17-year-old CLAT candidate Aditya, who had raised concerns about errors in the paper for undergraduate admissions to National Law Universities (NLUs). 

Justice Singh found clear errors in two out of five questions flagged by the candidate, stating that the Court could not adopt a hands-off approach when such obvious mistakes were identified. As a result, the Court directed the Consortium of NLUs to announce revised results, adjusting the marks for the two problematic questions.

The ruling was challenged before the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court by both the NLU Consortium and Justice Singh, whose petition led to the December 20 decision.

The NLU Consortium argued that the single-judge judge had improperly assumed the role of an expert and should not have interfered with exam answers that had been finalized by experts. On the other hand, Singh's appeal sought to modify the single-judge ruling, requesting that corrections be made not only for the two questions already identified but also for three additional questions he flagged, claiming there were 'blatant mistakes' in them.

Subsequently, the NLU Consortium approached the Supreme Court, seeking to transfer the matter to the top court.

Additionally, the CLAT PG exam has also been embroiled in controversy, with incorrect answer keys being challenged. The results of the PG exam are currently under challenge before the Madhya Pradesh and Bombay High Courts.