MUHAMMED SHAMEER C.P. Vs. PRINCIPAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that he is a graduate and presently working as a registered clerk to an Advocate. He says that he decided to pursue legal studies, so as to acquire a degree in law and that he has, therefore, applied for admission to the second respondent - Commissioner for Entrance Examinations. He says that even though he is fully qualified to be admitted to the three year LLB course, the first respondent - Principal of the MCT College of Legal Studies, Malappuram, has rejected his claim through Exhibit P6 communication and asserts that this is contrary to law and against the provisions of the applicable Prospectus for admission. The petitioner, therefore, prays that Exhibit P6 be set aside and the respondents be directed to offer him admission to the first respondent College.

(2.) In response to the submissions of Sri.P.Samsudin, learned counsel for the petitioner as afore, Sri.Rajit, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5, submitted that since the petitioner has obtained graduation through Distance Education mode, without having completed his Pre-Degree through a regular course, he would not be entitled to be enrolled as an Advocate on the Rolls of the Bar Council and consequently, that his admission in the Law College would be rendered without purpose. He pointedly sought my attention to the Proviso and Explanation to Rule 5 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), which reads as under :

(3.) Sri.Rajit, therefore, submitted that since the petitioner has acquired his degree through a Distance Education mode and he has, concededly, completed his Pre- Degree only thereafter, again through the same mode, he would not be eligible to stake any claim for admission.