The judgment establishes the principle that the requirement of minimum attendance or standards cannot be diluted, and the discretion for condoning the shortage of attendance is subject to the fulfillment of the minimum attendance requirement in each subject.

Writ petition by a student who had attended classes in the two years Pre-University Course and whose desire to write the examinations and complete the course was snuffed out by the Karnataka Pre-University Education, an organisation of the Department of Education, Government of Karnataka, for conducting examinations for the course, and the second respondent-college, where the petitioner had admitted and had undergone the course of study.

2. The student was not permitted to write the examination on the premise that he had not put in the requisite percentage of attendance in the class; that in a subject or two, the attendance was even below 60% of the total number of classes held for the year and as such the student was not entitled to take up the examinations, but was required to repeat the course.

3. It is in such circumstance, the present writ petition contending that the first respondent-organisation has not properly understood or appreciated the relevant provisions regulating attendance in classes by students and that even within the regulation, the student could have been permitted to take up examination etc.

4. Notices had been issued and interim order had also come to be passed by this Court, directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to write the examinations subject to the result of this writ petition in terms of the interim order granted by this Court on 27-3-2006. It appears that notwithstanding the interim order, the petitioner was able to write the examinations in four subjects held on and after 29-3-2006 and was not able to write the examinations in three papers which had been held prior to this date.

5. The result of the examinations has also been withheld. In the meanwhile, as the authority is receiving fee for appearance of students for the supplementary examinations scheduled to be held during the month of July 2006, it is urged on behalf of the petitioner by Sri Baliga, learned Counsel for the petitioner that the result of the examinations written by the petitioner should be directed to be announced and the petitioner be permitted to write the other papers.

6. The respondents have entered through Counsel and have filed statements of objections.

7. A few more facts are that the actual attendance of classes by the petitioner as indicated by the first respondent in its statement of objection is as under:

Kannada 70%

English 65%

Physics 63%

Chemistry 56%

Maths 64%

Biology 51 %

and this factual data is not disputed by the petitioner either. What is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has no means of verifying the correctness or otherwise of the data, but was forced to accept the version of the college.

8. What is urged on behalf of the respondents is that the attendance in the course is compulsory i.e., the student has to put in a minimum of 75% attendance for being eligible to take up the examinations; that an element of discretion is given to the head of the institution where the student is studying if the shortfall of attendance is between 60 and 75%, and if within that there is a shortfall, the head of the institution i.e., the principal of the college can, on the student furnishing a certificate and affidavit that the shortfall was attributable to some genuine reason or due to ill-health etc., supported by medical certificate, to condone such shortfall by accepting a fine of Rs. 25/-; that in the instant case, the shortfall being even below 60% in respect of two subjects i.e., in Chemistry and Biology, there was no discretion left to the principal of the college even if he would wish to exercise such discretion and accordingly there is no way to permit such students to write the examinations in the second year PUC.

9. In the light of such factual background, Sri Baliga, learned Counsel for the petitioner urges that the regulations in terms of guidelines issued for the purpose of regulating the attendance of classes by students for the academic year 2004-05 should be looked