RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
Heena Bahal – Appellant
Versus
University of Delhi – Respondent
D. MURUGESAN, J
1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The appellant was not allowed to appear in the 2nd Year final examinations in B.A. (Hons.), Economics on the ground that there was shortage of attendance. Having noticed that as per the prospectus requiring a minimum attendance of 66.66% in lectures and in tutorials/preceptorials/practicals separately in each subjects and the appellant did not have the said minimum attendance, the learned Judge rejected the request.
2. The prospectus relating to attendance rules reads thus:-
“All students are expected to attend classes regularly, University Rules requiring a minimum attendance of 66.66% both in lectures and in tutorials/preceptorials/practicals separately, held in each subject, failing which a student shall not be allowed to appear for the University Examinations.”
3. One more clause relating to the minimum attendance in the Ordinance VII may also be referred to:-
“2 (1) No person shall be deemed to have pursued a regular course of study unless the Principle of his College/ Head of the Department concerned in the case of
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.