RITVIK BALANAGRAJ B. Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in W.P.No.14389/2020 is a Law student of the Five Years Course. He has filed this writ petition challenging the Circular dated 09.11.2020 issued by the respondent-Karnataka State Law University (hereinafter referred to as the 'respondent- University' for short) and the Press release dated 01.11.2020 issued by the respondent-Bar Council of India (hereinafter referred to as 'Bar Council' for short). In short, the grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the Bar Council had earlier issued guidelines and instructions to all the Law Universities in the country, in view of the Covid-19 pandemic, directing that all the students, except the final year students, will be promoted on the basis of performance in previous semesters and marks obtained in the internal examination of the current year. However, by issuing the impugned Press release, the Bar Council directing all the Law Universities to conduct physical examination with the NOC of the State Government and State Disaster Management Authority, by giving the option to such law students who are unable and/or unwilling to appear in such physical exams till the Covid-19 pandemic is averted, and having appeared therein, who are unable to clear such exam, to appear in the re-appear exam after physical reopening of the University/Centres of Legal Education. It was also clarified that since the pandemic still persists with no early respite, the Council resolved that examination for all intermediary along with final year law students/classes too may be held online, if the Universities/Law Colleges are able to hold it online, and if adequate infrastructure and other facilities for students are available. Following the Press release of the Bar Council, the respondent-University issued the impugned Circular clarifying that there was a misunderstanding and confusion among the intermediate semester law students that there will be no examinations. Hence, the Circular was issued to clarify that the students studying in intermediate semesters have been promoted to take admission for next semester. However, the promotion of students to the next semester is only for the sake of admission. It was further directed that all the intermediate semester students who have been promoted to the next class are required to write intermediate examinations compulsorily as per the Bar Council Press release.

(2.) The main grievance sought to be put forth by petitioner is that the impugned Press release and Circular are not only contrary to the earlier guidelines issued, but are also contrary to the guidelines issued by the Universities Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the UGC' for short). It is an admitted fact that the petitioner along with another student had filed a writ petition in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation. However, it is submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition and file another writ petition in their individual capacity. Subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, two more students filed Interlocutory applications to implead themselves as party petitioners. However, they were directed to file separate writ petitions to raise a challenge to the action of the Bar Council and the University.

(3.) After the arguments were heard and the matter was reserved for orders, two more writ petitions in W.P.No.2197/2021 and W.P.No.1850/2021 came up for Preliminary Hearing. Since these writ petitions also raised similar challenge to the Press release and the impugned Circular, this common order is passed with respect to all the writ petitions, after hearing the learned Counsels for the petitioners and the respondents.