BENGALURU: After CLAT (Common Law Admission Test) candidates alleged that the answers they had chosen during the examination did not get reflected in the response sheet generated by the system, Consortium of National Law Universities, on Saturday, categorically denied descrepancies between the Clicks made by the candidate as recorded in the Audit Log and the Response Sheet.
The consortium said that the Expert Committee constituted by Prof. Balraj Chauhan, Convenor, CLAT-2020 and Vice-Chancellor, DNLU, Jabalpur had looked into the objections filed by the candidates.
When it examined the 'Mark for Review' objections, the commitee found that as per the rules/instructions, no marks were allocated to answers that were 'Marked for Review'.
The commitee examined the Audit Log of number of candidates who had raised the objections to the response sheet, did not find any discrepancy between the Clicks made by the candidate as recorded in the Audit Log and the Response Sheet, said the consortium.
Instead, in one case, they found that a candidate had changed responses six times, and the last response was accepted.
The service provider will make available to the Court the 'Audit Trail' of the candidate (which records the clicks and mouse movements) in case of a dispute, it said.
Following the Expert Committee’s Recommendation, the consortium decided to drop three questions of UG Examination and one question of PG Examinations. Also, keys to four answers (one each in English and Current Affairs including GK and two in Quantitative Techniques) were changed in UG examination. While, no change was made in the PG Examination key.
'Fee for objections next year onwards'
The committee noted that a large number of "unnecessary" objections were filed. Hence, the consortium decided to charge a fee for candidates who want to file for objections from next year onwards. And only if their objection is accepted, the charges will be refunded .