MANOHAR V. S/O VENKATASWAMY Vs. THE KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY NAVANAGAR, HUBLI 580025, THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN NEW DELHI AND THE VISVESWARAPURAM COLLEGE OF LAW REPRESENTED BY ITS PRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER having secured 39% in II P.U.C. examination has presented this petition calling in question the vires of Rule 7 of Part IV of Chapter II of the Rules of Legal Education framed by the Bar Council of India and Regulation 7(b) of the Karnataka State Law University's Regulations governing the five year B.A. LL.B integrated degree course in Law and the letter dt. 10.7.2012 Annexure -A of the Visveswarapuram College of Law declining admission to the petitioner into the five year integrated degree course in law. The main grievance of the petitioner is over the fixing of 45% a minimum percentage of marks in the qualifying examination for admission to five year integrated degree in Law under Rule 7 of Part IV of Chapter II of Rules of Legal Education. From perusal of the Rules of Legal Education what is discernable is that the said rules are framed for maintaining standards of Legal Education and recognition of degrees in law for the purpose of enrollment as an advocate and inspection of Universities for recognising its degrees in Law under the Advocates Act, 1961, made by the Bar Council of India in consultation with the Universities and State Bar Councils. The prescription of minimum percentage of marks not below 45% of the total marks in case of general category applicants and 40% of the total marks in case of SC and ST in the qualifying examination, i.e. Plus 2 examination in case of integrated Five year course or degree course in any discipline for 3 years LL.B. course for the purpose of applying and seeking admission to the law degree of any recognised university is in order to achieve proficiency in the profession of advocates. This being a reasonable restriction, the criteria cannot be said to be either arbitrary, capricious or in violation of fundamental rights. The need for proficiency is the hallmark of advocacy and prescription of minimum percentage of marks in the qualifying examination is with a salutary purpose. The submission of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the fixing of the minimum of percentage of marks militates against Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, must stand rejected.

(2.) REGULATION 7(b) of the Regulations governing the integrated degree course in Law is in conformity and in compliance with Rule 7 of the Rules of Legal Education issued by the Bar Council of India and as a consequence, the challenge to the said Rule stands rejected. The letter Annexure -A of the 3rd respondent -Visveswarapuram College of Law stating that the petitioner having secured less than 45% in the qualifying examination is ineligible for the admission to Law course for the academic year 2012 -12 cannot be faulted with.