ORDER :

R. Devdas, J.

1. This writ petition presents a bleak picture of how the 1st Regulations framed by the 1 respondent-Karnataka State' Law University have been violated, putting the career of the law students in jeopardy.

2. The petitioners are students of Five Year Law Course, studying in the 2nd respondent-institution. The crux of the matter is regarding the shortage of attendance of the petitioners either in the 4th semester, 5th semester, 6th semester or 7th semester, etc., and notwithstanding the deficiency, they are permitted to write examinations and the petitioners have been promoted to the next year course. In brief, the allegation against the petitioners is that, say in the 4th semester (end-of-semester examinations of the 2nd year) since, there was shortage of attendance, such a student could not have been permitted to take up the examinations, in terms of Regulations 13 of Regulations Governing The Five Year B.A., LL.B (Hons.) Integrated Honor's Degree Course in Law" (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations' for short). Such students in terms of Regulations 15(ii)(a) is required to repeat the course. However, all the petitioners were permitted to take up examinations, in spite of shortage of attendance and their succeeding in the examinations and proceeding to the next year, is an admitted fact. In fact, some of the petitioners have completed the entire course and have been issued certificates of having passed the Five Year Course and they have been practicing or some of them have taken up Bar examinations.

3. In the background of such scenario, the petitioners are before this Court calling in question the notice dated 09.10.2019 at Annexure-A1 issued by the 2 respondent-institution. In the impugned notice, the 2 respondent-institution has informed the students that the result of some of the students have been withheld by the University, whose names are mentioned at Annexure-A1 appended to the notice. On enquiry, it was found that the University had taken objections that students who had shortage of attendance in a particular semester must seek readmission to the same academic year. The 2 respondent-Institution sought for clarification in terms of a letter dated 19.09.2019 to which the University has replied vide a communication dated 03.10.2019 at Annexure-A2 that the said students cannot proceed to next semester and have to seek readmission. It is therefore stated in the impugned notice that the Institution being bound by the directions of the University, has directed all the students whose names are found at Annexure-A1 appended to the notice to take readmission to the same year where there was shortage of attendance. It is in this background that the instant writ petition has been filed calling in question the notice dated 09.10.2019 at Annexure-A1.

4. Sri M.V. Vedachala, learned Counsel submits that the impugned notice is absurd, such a direction at the hands of the respondents cannot be fulfilled. It is submitted that under similar circumstances, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Malavika Ramanand v. Karnataka State Law University in W.P. No. 63253/2016 and connected matters which were disposed of on 29.06.2017 has held that there is no specific requirement in the Regulations which could deny permission for third semester students to take up the second semester examination as repeater. Further, in the case of Miss. B.P. Komal v. M.S. Ramaiah College of Law and Another in W.P. No. 50654/2019 which was disposed of on 20.01.2020, by virtue of an interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner therein who was declined hall ticket to appear for the 9 and 10 semester examinations on the ground of shortage of attendance, was permitted to take up the examination. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner therein took up the examination and succeeded, but marks card was not issued in view of the pendency of the writ petition. Under such circumstances, the co-ordinate bench held tha