CLAT PG candidates move Kerala High Court challenging counselling fees

A petition has been filed before the Kerala High Court challenging the counselling fee structure prescribed for admission to postgraduate law programmes in National Law Universities (NLUs) through the Common Law Admission Test (CLAT) 2025 [Sandhra Eliza Suresh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.].Justice DK Singh on June 17 issued notice to the on Central government, the Consortium of NLUs, the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) on the petition which was filed by three candidates currently participating in the CLAT PG 2025 counselling process..The CLAT admission counselling process entails a two-tier fee structure. Initially, a counselling registration fee of ₹30,000 is levied by the consortium on candidates belonging to the general category, while candidates from Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST), Persons with Disability (PWD), Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and Other Backward Classes (OBC) are required to pay ₹20,000. Subsequently, upon allotment of a seat in any of the counselling rounds, candidates exercising either the 'freeze' (accepting the allotted seat) or 'float' (retaining the seat with eligibility for upward movement) options must pay a mandatory and non-refundable confirmation fee of ₹20,000.According to the petitioners, this creates an unjust barrier of entry for economically disadvantaged candidates and amounts to violation of the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. As per the plea,"While formally uniform, this fee fails to consider socio-economic disparities, resulting in a de facto exclusion of meritorious candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds. Such exclusion is antithetical to substantive equality and frustrates the constitutional vision of fair and merit-based access to professional education." .The petitioner-candidates contended that the fee structure lacks reasonableness and transparency, and imposes disproportionate pre-admission financial burden as the fees are not covered by scholarships or education loans. According to them, the consortium of NLUs is not rendering commensurate service to justify the levy of such exorbitant fees. They also argued that the fact that ₹20,000 is non-refundable contravenes UGC's Fee Refund Policy 2024-25 as well."The Confirmation Fee is ostensibly collected to secure the seat for a candidate who has been provisionally allotted a seat. However, it operates as a punitive measure for withdrawal. The policy dictates that this fee i1s non-refundable, regardless of whether the seat is later reallocated to another deserving candidate," it was submitted. The petitioners, therefore, sought orders from the Court to set aside the counselling registration and confirmation fees and to order the consortium to refund the full amount to them if they are not selected in the admission process. .The matter will be considered next on July 22. .The petitioners were represented by advocates Sarath KP, Risvi Muhammed and Gokul Krishnan R. They were assisted by the Legal Collective for Students’ Rights (LCSR), a student-led legal initiative that advocates for students' rights through strategic litigation, policy reform and grassroots legal aid.