Uttarakhand High Court Enforces Strict Attendance Policies
In a recent judicial decision, the Uttarakhand High Court upheld a private university’s decision to prevent a law student from participating in her 8th Semester examinations due to inadequate attendance. Justice Manoj Kumar Tiwari, presiding over the case, emphasized the importance of maintaining high educational standards by adhering to attendance requirements. The decision was issued on May 20.
Justice Tiwari noted that allowing students with insufficient attendance to sit for exams could undermine the integrity of legal education. He stated, “Grant of permission to a student who fails to meet the minimum standard of attendance on sympathetic considerations would be counterproductive, as it would bring lawlessness in educational institutions imparting instruction in Law Courses and would diminish the standard of education.”
Bar Council of India Supports Attendance Regulations
The law student in question had an attendance record of only 11 percent for the 8th semester, leading to her being barred from the exams starting on May 14. In her appeal to the court, she sought permission to sit for the exams despite her low attendance. However, the Bar Council of India (BCI) firmly opposed her plea, referencing the Legal Education Rules of 2008, which mandate a minimum attendance of 70% per semester to qualify for exams.
The BCI’s legal representative argued that the rules provide leniency only for students with attendance between 65% and 70%. Given the petitioner’s significantly low attendance, she did not qualify for any exemption. The court agreed with the BCI’s stance, reinforcing that the attendance rules are statutory. Justice Tiwari remarked, “Law is well settled that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued asking a public authority to act contrary to the law on the point.”
Legal Precedents and Future Considerations
The court acknowledged a recent Delhi High Court decision that no student should be barred from exams due to low attendance; however, Justice Tiwari noted that this judgment is currently under review by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Uttarakhand High Court decided not to deviate from the established attendance rules.
More Read
While the court upheld the university’s decision, it did offer the petitioner an opportunity to make a representation to the BCI within 24 hours. The court instructed the BCI to review her case and provide a resolution within a week.
Advocate Ayush Pokhriyal represented the petitioner, while Advocate Sandeep Tiwari appeared for the BCI.
[Read Order]
