SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 95

MADRAS HIGH COURT
[Name], J
Murugan B. and Others v. Secretary Bar Council of India and Others
Writ Petition No. 311 of 2014 | Writ Petition No. 312 of 2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: [Names]
For the Respondents: [Names]

University attendance requirements must align with Bar Council regulations, ensuring students are not unjustly denied educational progression.

Headnote:In the matter of Writ Petitions concerning attendance regulations for legal education, the court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Bar Council of India Rules. The petitioners argued they were wrongfully denied progression to their third year due to attendance below the threshold set by their university, whereas the university justified their regulations citing higher standards. The court found that the university's insistence on 80% attendance contradicted the legal minimums, leading to the conclusion that the petitioners should be permitted to continue their studies. The court ruled in favor of the petitioners.

Table of Content
1. petitioners request to advance in their legal studies. (Para 1 , 2)
2. university regulations on attendance are enforced. (Para 3)
3. arguments for and against attendance mandates presented. (Para 4 , 5)
4. legal standards for attendance must comply with bar council rules. (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 17)
5. court's decision to allow petitioners to continue their studies. (Para 22 , 23)

1. The prayer in all these Writ Petitions is for a mandamus, directing the respondents to allow the petitioners to continue their 3rd year B.A.,B.L.(Hons.) course in the third respondent college.

2. According to the petitioners, they got admissions in the third respondent college in the year 2011 for the Law Course B.A., B.L.(Hons.) and now they are to join 3rd year course; their college informed them that they are short of attendance in two subjects and hence they have not been allowed to do their 3rd year course; they got above 80% attendance in all the subject classes except one or two subjects, but the college authorities have on their own fixed the minimum attendance in each subject at 80% and they were not allowed to write the examination in the subjects, which lack the required percentage of attendance. Their further case is that the minimum
attendance fixed by the third respondent college is against the Bar Council of India Rules (Under the Advocates Act 1961), as per which rules, the minimum required attendance is 66%; if they are not permitted to do their third year course, they will be put to great hardship and loss and that they also submitted representations to the third respondent in this regard, but there is no response. Hence, these Writ Petitions.

3. Stand of the respondents in their counter affidavit is as under :
3.1 As per Regulation 13 of the third respondent University, no candidate shall be permitted to write any trimester examination unless he has attended the course in the subject for the prescribed period and produces the necessary certificate of study, attendance and conduct from the Head of the Institution; a candidate is required to put in a minimum of 80% attendance in all internal subjects / written, practical and clinical separately in each subject before admission to the examination; if the candidate is lacking in attendance in any one of the subjects, he / she will be detained from writing the examination in the subject in which he / she lacks attendance, but will be permitted to appear for the rest of the subjects in which the candidate is having minimum required percentage of attendance; however, the candidate cannot progress to the next academic year / semester and will be detained in the same year / semester until he / she fulfils the required attendance percentage by attending classes during the extension / detention period in the said subjects and passes the examination.
3.2. The petitioners, after getting admission by agreeing to abide by the regulations of the University, had undergone course for 1st year of the 5 year integrated B.A., B.L.(Hons.) course during the year 2011-2012; during the 2nd year of study 2012-2013, they fell short of 80% of attendance in the 6th trimester, which ended on 14.08.2013, because of which they were not allowed to write the examination of 6th trimester and to proceed to 7th trimester during the academic year 2013-2014, which commenced on 16.09.2013 and ended on 09.12.2013, as per the regulations framed by the university for law course.
3.3. Unless a student has 80% of attendance in each subject, he / she cannot get through the continuous internal assessment which includes three monthly tests, group discussion, seminar and paper presentation conducted only once on the scheduled date and each student has to obtain 18 marks out of 50 marks to make himself eligible to sit for the university examinations. Only continuous uninterrupted attendance in classes will help the students in scoring the minimum required percentage of attendance or otherwise they would find it difficult






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top