MOHANAN M.E Vs. THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved with the fact that the petitioners were not imparted the class room instructions as stipulated by the Bar Council of India, which the University has to scrupulously follow. The reliance placed is on Rule 10 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 framed by the Bar Council of India [BCI]. Which is extracted hereunder:

(2.) The petitioners also rely on the judgment of this Court reported in Satheesh Kumar v. Mahatma Gandhi University [2015 (4) KLT 151], wherein it has been found that the prescription of the minimum hours of lecture classes and holding of tutorials, moot court and seminars by the BCI are to be scrupulously followed by the University. The possible lag in the course and telescoping of classes has been held to be an impermissible exercise. It was also held that the University cannot commit breach of the statutory rules, which have overriding effect even on the regulations of the University.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that on the basis of the above Rule and the binding precedent, the examinations now scheduled for 25.05.2016 has to be adjourned, since admittedly only 83 working days were available in the semester completed by the petitioners. The prescription as per Rule 10 falls short by 7 days and without holding 35 classes more the examination cannot be scheduled, is the argument.