SUKRITI UPADHYAY Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Calling in question the legal substantiality of the order dated 12th July, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 13354/2009, the present intra-Court appeal has been preferred under clause 10 of the Letters Patent. Be it noted, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the said writ petition along with other writ petitions by a composite order.

(2.) The facts which are requisite to be stated are that the appellant- petitioner (hereinafter referred to as ,,the appellant) was a student of first semester in the LL.B course in University of Delhi and her attendance was 56%. It was pleaded that she could not attend classes as she was suffering from back ache and infection in the digestive system as a result of which she was compelled to go to her hometown in Rajasthan from 1st August, 2009 to 1st September, 2009. She was allowed to take the first semester examination and thereafter further examinations because of the interim directions of this Court. It was contended in the writ petition that the appellant had attended all the lectures in the subject of Law of Torts and Family Law but was awarded only 50% and 60% attendance on account of the fact that the attendance was marked on chit papers and not in the attendance registers and due to the said commotion, to get the attendance marked at the end of the lecture, many students frequently were not able to get their attendance marked. It was averred that clause 2(9)(a)(ii) of the Ordinance VII of the respondent-University is still applicable and, therefore, the competent authority of the University could exercise the power of relaxation but they have deliberately deprived the appellant the said benefit of relaxation. It was also urged that the stipulation in the clause in question is not mandatory but directory.

(3.) The stand put forth by the appellant was combatted by the University stating, inter alia, that clause 2(8)(a) of Ordinance VII has to be read in conjunction with Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as ,,1975 Rules) and on a conjoint reading of the same, it would be graphically clear that a student must secure 66% attendance in each subject in each semester. It was further put forth that under the proviso to the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India, only in exceptional cases, the Dean, Faculty of Law / Professor-in-charge, Law Centre concerned can condone attendance short of those required by the said Rule, if such students have 66% of attendance in aggregate and for that the said Dean or the Professor-in- Charge is required to record reasons for communication of the same to the Bar Council of India.