Back
Attendance Rules Are Non-Negotiable: Refuses Exam Relief for Law Student
The has delivered a stern reminder regarding the sanctity of academic attendance requirements. In a recent judgment, the Court dismissed a petition filed by a law student who sought to bypass mandatory attendance thresholds to appear for her 8th-semester examinations, ruling that cannot override .
The Attendance Crisis The dispute arose when a law student, whose attendance during the 8th semester stood at a mere 11 percent, was barred by her institution from sitting for the end-term examinations scheduled for . Facing the prospect of a lost semester, the petitioner approached the High Court seeking a to compel the college to allow her to take the remaining papers.
The Bar Council’s Regulatory Shield The (), represented by counsel, mounted a robust defense. Citing the , the argued that the mandate is clear: students are required to maintain a minimum of 70 percent attendance to qualify for examinations.
The counsel noted that while the Rules offer a narrow discretionary window—allowing Deans or Vice-Chancellors to grant exemptions for students with attendance between 65 percent and 70 percent—the petitioner’s "abysmally low" record placed her entirely outside the scope of any permissible relief.
vs. Sympathetic Relief The petitioner attempted to bolster her case by pointing to a recent decision from the , which suggested that students should not be barred from academic progression due to attendance constraints. However, the successfully countered that the said judgment is currently under challenge before the .
Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari accepted the ’s stance, emphasizing that courts cannot issue a mandate that directs public authorities to act in violation of established law. The court acknowledged the critical role of the as a regulatory body, noting that attendance standards are not mere administrative formalities but necessary tools to ensure discipline in legal education.
Key Observations The judgment offers a sobering warning regarding the impact of academic leniency:
-
"
is a regulatory body, which has laid down
regarding attendance in order to maintain discipline and order in law colleges."
-
"Grant of permission to student who fails to meet the minimum standard of attendance on sympathetic considerations would be counterproductive, as it would bring lawlessness in educational institutions."
-
"Law is well settled that a
cannot be issued asking a
2026:UHC:3927 to act contrary to the law on the point."
The Path Forward for the Petitioner While the Court refused to interfere with the attendance rule, it offered a final, limited avenue for the student. The bench disposed of the petition by permitting the student to make a formal representation to the within 24 hours. The has been tasked with considering this representation and passing an appropriate order within one week.
This decision reinforces the principle that professional degree standards cannot be compromised by , even in cases of individual hardship. For law students across the country, the message is clear: when it comes to the set by the , the rules are not merely guidelines—they are the bedrock of academic integrity.
