#CLAT2015: Censors censure, examinees must “feel pulse of it” – CLAT’s Expert Committee findings revealed

Just when it seemed like the controversies had been put to rest, or at least stonewalled into submission, the CLAT Core Committee has outdone itself with another glaring error. This time around, it is the findings of the “expert committee” set up to re-examine the CLAT answer key..Unsurprisingly, the expert committee has not found a single error in the answer key. What is surprising though, is the logic used to reach this conclusion..Documents accessed by Bar & Bench show how the expert committee has given (another) clean chit to those vested with the task of conducting the exam. And it does not make for a pretty sight. On more than one occasion, it appears that the expert committee has gone to great lengths to protect the CLAT Committee..Impartiality and a fair enquiry be damned..For example, question ID 1733 reads as follows:.Dulcet: Raucous.Options.(A) Sweet: Song.(B) Crazy: Insane.(C) Palliative: Exacerbating.(D) Theory: Practical.As per the answer key, the correct answer is B. And what about the expert committee? Answer “B” it is. But it is the justification offered though, that is more troubling. In fact, it borders on the ludicrous..“Prima facie both the words seem to be antonymous. Since this is a question of comprehension, the examinee is expected to feel the pulse of it, and naturally that way “dulcet” will give ironical sense of “sweet and soothing”..There is more..“Anything which is dulcet is sweet- therefore, sweetness may lead to indulgence or engagement in a situation/or in a given thing similarly in a crazy situation the person goes wide and crazy….”.Much rambling later, there is little doubt as to what the expert committee is trying to do. Interestingly, this was specific examples used by petitioner Shubham Dutt in his challenge before the Bombay High Court..And this is not a lone example..In Question ID 1703 for instance, the expert committee wants to believe that critics “censor”, and not “censure” a movie because of its social unacceptability..Then, in Question ID 1914, the candidates were required to apply a pattern of coding to determine the answer to:.If FASHION is z64t7w, then POSITION is?.Quite clearly, the number of characters in the code is different from the number of letters in both “fashion” and “position”, something the committee has overlooked..Perhaps the one that takes the cake is their explanation of the answer to question ID 1921. The question reads:.From the word ‘laparoscopy’, how many independent meaningful English words can be made without changing the order of the letters and using each letter only once?.The expert committee confidently explains,.“Two meaningful words can be made. ‘Laparo’ and ‘Scopy’…’Laparo’ means abdominal wall and ‘Scopy’ means scanning instrument.”.These are just a few examples of how the expert committee has sought to justify the answer key. If there was ever a better time to file a fresh challenge to the expert committee, now would be it..Read the complete findings below:.Image taken from here