IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV, J.
Dhanush B.N., S/o. Nagesh B.C. and Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Karnataka State Law University, Represented By Its Registrar and Anr. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 14591 Of 2024 (EDN-RES) C/W Writ Petition No. 17235 Of 2024 (EDN-RES)
Decided On : 25-07-2024
Regulations - Attendance - Regulation 13, Regulation 15A - The court interpreted the attendance requirements under the Karnataka State Law University Regulations, emphasizing that students must maintain a minimum attendance of 70% to progress to the next semester, impacting the petitioners' eligibility.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, students of a law college, were denied permission to write their examinations due to insufficient attendance below the required 70%, despite being promoted to the 5th year.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners did not meet the attendance requirements as stipulated in the regulations, which prevented them from progressing to the next semester.
Issues: Whether the petitioners could be allowed to attend the 10th semester despite not fulfilling the attendance requirement for the 9th semester.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a student must 'keep the terms' by maintaining the required attendance to progress to the next semester, distinguishing between failing a subject and failing to meet attendance requirements.
Result: The petitions were rejected, and the petitioners must complete the 9th semester before attending the 10th semester.
ORDER :
(S. Sunil Dutt Yadav, J.) :
In W.P.No.14591/2024
The petitioners are students of respondent No.2- Christ Academy Institute of Law, Bengaluru pursuing their Five Years (Semester Scheme) LL.B. Course.
2. The Karnataka State Law University, Hubballi has formulated Regulations governing the Course which governs the respondent No.2 College as well.
3. It is submitted that the petitioners undisputedly have been promoted to 5th year and though attended the classes for 9th Semester, they were not permitted to write the examination, in light of attendance being below the required 70%.
4. The petitioners then sought to attend the classes for 10th Semester and were not permitted in terms of the communication through Email at Annexure-'G' and accordingly, have filed the present petition seeking setting aside of the communication through E-mail at Annexure-'G' dated 03.06.2024.
5. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that Regulation 13 of "Karnataka State Law Universities Regulations Governing the Five year B.A. LL.B. Integrated Degree Course in Law" ['the Regulations' for brevity], (Amended in 2020), if read with Regulation 15 would permit the petitioners to pursue 10th Semester, though they have not completed their 9th semester due to shortage of attendance.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for Karnataka State Law University (KSLU) would contend that in terms of Regulation 15A(d), it is only a student who has "kept the terms of any semester" shall be allowed to go to next semester and accordingly, though the student who fails in the semester is entitled to go to next semester that would be in keeping in terms of the Regulations, which permit the attending of end-of-semester, however, where a student does not fulfill the requirement of attendance, he/she would not be in compliance with requirement under Regulation 15A(d).
7. It is submitted that on a proper reading of Regulation 13, there is a requirement to "keep the term by putting in not less than 70% attendance in the Course concerned".
8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2-College has adopted the submissions of learned counsel appearing for KSLU.
9. Heard Sri Yogesh V. Kotemath, learned counsel appearing for Sri P.H.Virupakshaiah for the petitioners, Sri R. Girish Kumar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-KSLU and Sri M.P.Srikanth for respondent No.2-College.
10. To avoid repetition, the detailed contentions are considered while analyzing the contentions.
11. It must be noticed that Regulation 13 and 15A are extracted hereinbelow which govern attendance and promotion.
Provided that a student who has attended not less than 65% of classes in each of the subjects prescribed may be permitted to keep the term for reasons to be recorded in writing and to the satisfaction of the Principal of the college or the Dean of the faculty as the case may be.
15.A. Students admitted after coming into force of this regulation shall complete their degrees within the time frame detailed below:
(a). Every student shall be promoted to next higher classes irrespective of the fact that he has failed in any of the papers prescribed for the study.
(b). Students are required to successfully complete the entire course within Seven years (Five years of normal duration plus two years of extended duration) from admission to the course.
(c) The candidates who does not complete their degree within Seven years shall be given an extended period of one more year in exceptional circumstances mentioned herein after. When the candidate is unable to appear for the examinations
Students must maintain a minimum attendance of 70% to progress to the next semester as per the regulations, which the court upheld.
The Court upheld the necessity of minimum attendance requirements for examinations in educational institutions, emphasizing the impact on academic integrity.
University attendance requirements must align with Bar Council regulations, ensuring students are not unjustly denied educational progression.
Judicial intervention in academic attendance regulations is limited; courts cannot condone non-compliance with university attendance rules which uphold academic discipline.
Legal education standards must be upheld, allowing for exceptions in legitimate medical cases, while reevaluating rigid attendance policies for the welfare of students.
Academic institutions must adhere strictly to attendance regulations as established by legal education rules, allowing discretion only within the specified limits.
Strict attendance requirements upheld; condonation requires Syndicate approval under university statutes, not court intervention without proper pleadings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.