Why IIM Ahmedabad’s AC-5 Criteria is Mathematically RIGGED Against Law/NLU Graduates
Edit- 😭idk why engineers got triggered after reading this. It was news to me that so many of you face the same issue. I request you that instead of making this an engineer vs non-engineer debate, please see the point I'm trying to make - This current policy effectively treats institutional grading differences as an applicant's academic failure. We're literally on the same team :)
Hello everyone,
If you are a law graduate (especially from an NLU) or any non-engineer prepping for CAT, there exists a massive policy failure at IIM Ahmedabad that is completely flying under the radar and needs to be talked about.
We know IIM-A has "Academic Categories" to bring in diversity. As lawyers, we are put into AC-5 alongside Arts, Humanities, and Liberal Arts graduates. On paper, it sounds great—we don't have to compete with 99.9%ile engineers.
But in reality? The math is completely rigged against us because of categorical clumping.
Anyone who went to an NLU knows how notoriously brutal the grading is. Getting above 70% usually means you are in the top 10% of your batch. I can only tell you about my uni but I assure you it isn't far off in other NLUs, as a matter of fact it is worse in some colleges like Faculty of Law, DU.
Now look at central or state university humanities/arts departments. Because of incredibly liberal marking, students regularly graduate with 75%, 80%, or even 85% aggregates.
Because IIM-A clumps us all into AC-5, we are forced to compete directly against these inflated scores.
How this kills IIM-A dreams:
- Pathway 1 (The Direct Interview Bypass) is impossible: To get a direct interview call through Pathway 1 (the top 5% of your category), your grad score must be ≥ the 80th percentile of the total AC-5 pool. Because the pool is flooded with high-scoring humanities grads, that cutoff sits around 77%–79%. This would sit around a CGPA of more than 8.2 which is extremely rare in a law school. My class topper, with 4163/5500 ~ 76% marks would not be able to meet this criteria.
- Pathway 2 (The Composite Score) : If you have a 65% from an NLU (which is usually class average), you get slammed with a terrible Application Rating (AR) score (5 out of 10). To make up for this structural deficit against a humanities grad who got a 10/10 for an 78% score, you don't just need a good CAT score. You need a near-impossible 99.85+ percentile.
This current policy effectively treats institutional grading differences as an applicant's academic failure.
Other top colleges already solved this:
- IIM Calcutta & FMS Delhi completely scrap graduation marks for the initial interview call.
IIM Ahmedabad needs to fix this ahead of the next cycle. The solution is simple:
- Create an exclusive AC-7 category for Law grads so the percentile calculation is fair.
- Or, scrap grad marks as an essential eligibility.
I'm drafting a formal representation letter to send to the IIM-A Admissions Committee. If you are a law grad or a non-engineer who feels cheated by these broad categories, upvote this for visibility. Our best chance for a policy shift is to push for institutional dialogue.
Would love to connect with you if you're facing the same and explore other ways to bring about a positive change for fellow lawyers.