Penalties for attendance discrepancies must be justified and backed by clear regulations; arbitrary reductions in student intake are unreasonable if lacking sufficient rationale.

JUDGMENT :

S.G. PANDIT, J.

1. Respondent Nos.2 and 3-National Commission for Indian System of Medicine (for short ‘NCISM’) are before this Court under Section 4 of the Karnataka High Court Act, 1961 questioning the correctness and legality of the learned Single Judge’s order dated 12.09.2025 in W.P.No.106576/2025, wherein the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 reducing the intake from 100 to 70 seats for the academic session 2025-26 is quashed with a direction to continue intake of 100 seats.

2. The parties would be referred to as per their rank before the learned Single Judge. The appellants herein were respondent Nos.2 and 3 and respondent Nos.1 and 2 were petitioner Nos.1 and 2 before the learned Single Judge.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, it is stated that the petitioners-Institution was established in the year 1996 with an intake capacity of 25 undergraduate seats. It is stated that by order dated 05.09.2014, the Central Council for Indian Medicine on satisfying with the infrastructure facilities of the petitioners-Institution increased the intake capacity to 60 undergraduate seats from the academic session 2014 onwards. On further examination of the infrastructure, by order dated 13.10.2016, intake capacity of the petitioners-Institution was increased to 100 undergraduate seats from the academic year 2016-17 onwards. It is also stated that on 26.11.2016, Central Government granted permission for 10 postgraduate seats from the academic session 2016-17 onwards.

4. It is stated that for the academic year 2025-26, NCISM notified the requirements and opened its website for submission of applications from 07.01.2025 onwards till 21.01.2025. It is stated that the petitioners-Institution submitted an application along with all requisite details. In pursuance to the said application, the respondent authorities on 08/09.04.2025 inspected the petitioners- Institution for grant of permission for the academic year 2025-26. Thereafter, show cause notice dated 08.05.2025 was issued to the petitioners-Institution stating that attendance data recorded through the Aadhar Enabled Biometric Attendance System (AEBAS) was verified and none of the teaching faculty members were meeting the minimum required attendance percentage of 65%, even after provision of 10% of relaxation. The discrepancy in attendance registration raises suspicion regarding the regular presence of teaching faculty and called upon the petitioners-Institution to submit clarification for each faculty member who has failed to meet the requirement of 65% attendance till the date of visitation.

5. It is further stated that, the petitioners-Institution submitted their reply dated 10.05.2025 stating that the petitioners-Institution is located in a remote area of the Western Ghats where frequently they are facing issues such as network interruptions, power outages and adverse weather conditions which affected the smooth functioning of AEBAS devise. They also stated that the installation and enrolment of teachers into AEBAS system was completed on 08.02.2025. Apart from that, manual attendance is being maintained as a temporary backup.

6. It is stated that the respondent authorities without considering the explanation of the petitioners- Institution, communication dated 25.08.2025 was issued reducing the intake from 100 to 70 undergraduate seats for the academic sessions 2025-26. Questioning the said communication, the petitioners-Institution was before the learned Single Judge. Learned Single Judge on hearing the learned