Delhi High Court Upholds CAT 2024 Exam Results Amidst Controversy

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition contesting CAT 2024 results critical for IIM admissions. The petitioner cited discrepancies in the answer key, claiming it skewed results. The court found no substantial grounds for intervention, while IIM Calcutta defended the exam's integrity, despite concerns over transparency and expert review.

In a significant ruling on Tuesday, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the legitimacy of the CAT 2024 examination results. The outcome of this exam is vital for entry into the prestigious Indian Institutes of Management (IIMs) and other leading business schools. The petition was initiated by a candidate who alleged that errors in the official answer key had profoundly affected the exam results. However, the bench found no justification for interference.

Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju, during the January 3 hearing, remarked that the court's role in competitive examination disputes is generally reserved for instances of considerable error. The petitioner's claim revolved around an alleged mistake in a question, supported by feedback from coaching centers and peer candidates. Notably, 272 objections were registered concerning the questioned item, yet IIM Calcutta, responsible for the exam, failed to clarify the correctness of its answer.

The case also raised transparency issues, as the identities of expert reviewers were not disclosed. Videos from coaching institutes highlighting discrepancies were presented to the court. IIM Calcutta's counsel, Senior Advocate Arvind Nayar, rejected the petition vigorously, arguing that subject matter experts had thoroughly vetted the objections. Despite debates over their conclusions, the qualifications of these experts were presented confidentially to the court. The petitioner drew parallels to a prior Delhi High Court decision concerning CLAT exam rectifications, criticizing IIM Calcutta's opaqueness. The candidate argued that the premature results announcement hindered legal recourse, with the exam occurring on November 24, provisional answers on December 3, and final results on December 19. A call was made for an expert reassessment of the disputed answers.

(With inputs from agencies.)