1. Petitioners have sought the following reliefs in these writ petitions:

“(a) to declare the Regulations at Annexures C to F are unconstitutional, consequentially, issue writ of certiorari to quash the Annexures C to F as ultra Vires to Rules of Legal Education, 2008 framed by Bar Council of India;

(b) to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ to direct the respondent to allow the petitioners to pursue 5 year Integrated Degree Course in Law at Annexures C and D alike student pursuing 3 year LL.B Degree Course in Law at Annexure-E by promoting them to IV year of 5 year B.A., LL.B Integrated Degree Course in Law at Annexure- F in any class by strictly adhering to the provisions of Chapter II of Rules of Legal Education, 2008 framed under Sections 7(1)(h) and (i) 24(1)((c)iii) and (iiia), 49(1)(af), (ag) and (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961;

(c) to issue Writ of Mandamus or any other writ to direct the respondent to give admission to the petitioners to fourth year of their 5 year B.A. LL.B., Integrated Degree Course in Law for academic year 2018-2019 to enable them for admission to further year of 5 year B.A, LL.B, Integrated Degree Course in Law for academic year 2019-2020;

(d) to grant such other order or relief to which the petitioners may be found entitled to under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice.”

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they are pursuing their Five Year B.A. LL.B Integrated Degree Course in Law in Shree Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara Law College and Centre for Post Graduate Studies and Research in Law, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Mangaluru, which is affiliated to the respondent-University. That petitioner No.1 has completed I to IV Semesters B.A. LL.B. Examinations conducted by respondent. Petitioner No.1 did not pass in all subjects of V Semester examination conducted in December 2017 by the respondent. Later, she prosecuted VI Semester and appeared in the VI Semester Examination. Petitioner No.2 also took up her V Semester Examination in December 2017 conducted by the respondent. She passed in one subject in V Semester and failed in the remaining subjects and failed in all subjects of VI Semester Examination. As a result, petitioners have become ineligible to be promoted to the VII Semester which is in the fourth year of Law Degree on account of Regulation-15 of the Karnataka State Law University’s Regulations (hereinafter referred to as `Regulations’ for the sake of brevity) governing Five Year B.A. LL.B Integrated Degree Course in Law, which reads as under:

“15 PROMOTION

(a) No student shall be promoted to the next year of the course unless he/she has passed in a minimum of one subject in each semester.

(b) Students are required to successfully complete the entire course within ten years from admission to the course.”

In the circumstances, petitioners have assailed the said Regulation which according to them is in conflict with the Bar Council of India Rules of Legal Education (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules’ for the sake of convenience) by seeking the aforesaid prayers.

3. I have heard learned counsel for petitioners, Sri. Giridhar H. and Smt. Saritha Kulkarni, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University and perused the material on record.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners drew my attention to Entry 25 of List III – Concurrent List as well as Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. He contended that having regard to Entry 66 of List I in the guise of exercising powers under Entry 25 of List -III respondent – University could not have passed the impugned Regulation, as it is an infraction of Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule. In this regard, learned counsel for petitioners drew my attention to Section 7 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’ for the sake of brevity) in which the functions of the Bar Council of India are delineated and he contended, one of the functions of the Bar Council of India is to promote lega