Legal education standards must be upheld, allowing for exceptions in legitimate medical cases, while reevaluating rigid attendance policies for the welfare of students.

ORDER :

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

The Writ Petition in W.P.No.42641 of 2025 is filed by B.Vadhanan, a IV year student of the School of Excellence in Law, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his representation, dated 03.11.2025 and allow him to take his VII semester LL.B., examination. He was unable to attend the VII semester classes from August, 2025 to October 2025 due to an acute lumbar strain, which, on medical advice, prevented him from travelling to college. The medical certificate and the documents evidencing the diagnosis and treatment are filed along with the Writ Petition. As a result, his attendance dropped to 44%, below the mandatory 70%. The university did not permit him to write the examination. As per the university rules, he must redo the course next year. The petitioner is therefore before this Court. The examination was scheduled to start on 07.11.2025. Under these circumstances, the petitioner filed this Writ Petition on 04.11.2025, and an interim order was granted on 05.11.2025, allowing him to appear for the examination without prejudice to the parties' rights. Subsequently, the papers were directed to be valued, and the results were to be kept in a sealed cover.

2. The Writ Petition was resisted by the respondent – University. A counter affidavit was filed. The details of the classes attended by the petitioner from June, 2025 to October, 2025 are given. It is stated that as per Rule-12, Chapter-I of the Rules of Legal Education framed by the Bar Council of India, 70% of attendance is mandatory, and the University can condone up to 5%. Candidates securing less than 65% of attendance cannot be permitted to write the examination. For the benefit of students falling short, the University also conducts special classes so that the students can meet the minimum requirements, but, the petitioner also did not attend those. If the petitioner’s case is considered, it will set a precedent for everyone.

3. During the course of arguments, two additional affidavits are filed on behalf of the student that he will attend the classes without any default with reference to the VIII Semester. He is also ready to undertake special classes or other directions, such as assignments, library work, or other tasks, to compensate for the shortfall.

4. W.P.No.43650 of 2025 is filed by A.Miruthula Shre. She is pursuing her IV year LL.B degree at the Government Law College, Coimbatore. On 28.07.2025, while traveling to her college by train, she suddenly fainted and was admitted to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore, where her RPG was recorded at 490 mg/dl and she was diagnosed with Diabetes Mellitus, requiring continuous treatment. The medical certificate and records are produced. Therefore, she was irregular in attending classes and has only 36.9% attendance. When she applied for the VII semester examination, her name was shown in the "Redo the course" list. As the examinations were about to commence on 13.11.2025, the Writ Petition was filed on 10.11.2025. An interim order permitting her to write the examination, without prejudice to the rights of the parties, was granted on 12.11.2025.

5. The Writ Petition is resisted by the respondents. The Principal of the college filed a counter affidavit, detailing the petitioner's attendance. It is stated that the petitioner has only 36.9%, which is significantly less than the mandatory 70% as prescribed under the rules and the condonable limit of 5%. Medical conditions cannot be used as a ground to bypass academic