Allowed

Rahul S/O Lxman Bhojane v. Karnataka State Law University

Karnataka HC18 Feb 2021WA/100009/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Division Bench entertained a writ appeal against a Single Judge's order to grant the appellant admission to the second year of a LL.B course for the 2020-21 academic year. The court issued directions to the college authority to enable the students join immediately due to his age constraints for a future career in the Armed Forces and pandemic-related barriers.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent colleges to grant admission to the appellant for the 2020-21 academic year; admitted fees must be deposited; Single Judge to complete admission process;

Rahul S/O Lxman Bhojane Vs Karnataka State Law… — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH

¶3

DATED THIS THE 18^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶8

WRIT APPEAL NO.100009/2021 (EDN-EX)

¶9

BETWEEN

¶10

RAHUL S/O LAXMAN BHOJANE AGE. 26 YEARS, OCC. STUDENT, R/O. JYOTIRLING NIWAS, S.NO.18/1, LANE-7, CHOWDHARY PARK, DIGHI, PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411015. …APPELLANT

¶11

(PARTY-IN-PERSON)

¶12

AND

¶13

KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY SUTAGATTI ROAD, NAVANAGAR, DHARWAD, REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, KARNATAKA-580025.

¶14

THE CHAIRMAN, GOVERNING COUNCIL, RAJA LAKHAMGOUDA LAW COLLEGE, KARNATAKA LAW SOCIETY, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA-590006.

¶15

THE PRINCIPAL RAJA LAKHAMGOUDA LAW COLLEGE, KARNATAKA LAW SOCIETY, TILAKWADI, BELAGAVI, KARNATAKA-590006.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(By SRI.K.L.PATIL, ADV. FOR R1 SRI R.M.KULKARNI, ADV. FOR R2 & R3)

¶18

THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO, SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 07.01.2021 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE SINGLE JUDGE OF THIS HON'BLE HIGH COURT IN WRIT PETITION NO.114801/2019 CONNECTED WITH WRIT PETITION NO.100052/2021.

¶19

- 2 -

¶20

THIS WRIT APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, G.NARENDAR J., , DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Heard the party-in-person, Sri Rahul S/o: Laxman Bhojane and Sri K.L.Patil, learned counsel on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3 and Sri R.M.Kulkarni, learned counsel on behalf of respondent No.3

¶23

The party-in-person had approached this Court in W.P.Nos.100052/2021 C/w W.P.No.114801/2019 seeking for a writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to conduct the appellant’s admission for the second and third year of three years LL.B course and allow the appellant to join the course in fifth semester for the academic year 2020-21.

¶24

Learned Single Judge after hearing the party-inperson and the learned counsels and after taking note of the concession and assertions made by the party-in-person and concession by the respondents was pleased to partly allow the writ petitions, thereby permitting the party-in-person to seek admission into Second year Law Degree Course in the ensuing academic year 2020-2021.

¶25

¶26

The appellant - party-in-person would fairly submit that he had indeed conceded and that despite concession, he was constrained to approach this Court in view of the fact that the concession was made without realizing that if he is not admitted to this academic year i.e., 2020-21, in the light of his present age, he would be disabled from appearing and from taking up certain avocations namely, Judge/Advocate General post in the Indian Army and other avenues. He would further submit that his family members are largely associated with the Defence Forces and his father retired as a Subedar after serving the Indian Army for 27 years and that it is his burning desire to continue the tradition and serve in the Defence Force and that only on this ground, he is constrained to approach the Division Bench and that he would fervently plead that he shall be given an opportunity to realize his dream of serving the Armed Forces as has been a tradition in his own and his extended family. He would submit that he being from the neighbouring State, his attempts to seek admission and had run into rough weather on account of quarantine restrictions stipulated by the State of Karnataka and also the reluctance of respondent No.3-College to grant admission. He would submit that whatever actions done by

¶27

¶28

him were borne out, of frustration and that he never intended to smear the fair name of the institution and that he is aware of the glorious history of the college and his immature acts be ignored.

¶29

He would submit that the instant appeal shall not in

¶30

anyway be viewed as seeking to derogate the order of the learned Single Judge and that the appeal is preferred only in the background of the fact that if he is not granted admission during the present academic year, he would lose his chance to join the Armed Forces.

¶31

Per contra, the learned counsels for the respondents would fairly admit that the learned Single Judge has passed an order on the concession made by the parties. They would submit that the activities of the appellant/party-in-person has caused distress to the Management and that his attempts to paint the Institution black, cannot be countenanced and hence the College Authorities were constrained to deny admission and advised him to seek admission elsewhere. Learned counsel for the respondents, both for the Institution and the University, would fairly submitted that the object of both the parties is to advance the academic career of students and it has never been their

¶32

¶33

object or desire to destroy the academic career or future of any

¶34

students who have sought to pass through their gates.

¶35

The fair submission on behalf of the respondents is to

¶36

be appreciated.

¶37

It is not in doubt that the pandemic has played a devastating role and stumped the career prospects of many aspirant, forcing the authorities like the UGC to issue guidelines as to how to deal with the students who have been forced to miss the semesters on account of the closure of the colleges. In fact, one such guideline issued by the University Grants Commission in the month of April’2020 is placed before us. The paragraphs 6 and 9, in our opinion are relevant for the instant case and read as follows:

¶38

In addition to the above, following steps are required to be taken:

¶39

i. The scheme of “Carry forward” (for the subjects in which the student has failed) will be allowed for the current academic year in the Universities and every student will be promoted to next semester/year. However, such students may clear the examination for the course in which he/she has failed/remained absent, whenever the examination is held next.

¶40

ii. The students may be allowed to improve their grades by offering one additional opportunity to

¶41

¶42

appear for the current semester course(s) in succeeding semesters/ years or through supplementary examinations.

¶43

Regarding the requirement of minimum percentage of attendance for the students/research scholars, the period of lockdown may be treated as ‘deemed to be attended’ by all the students/research scholars.

¶44

Further, a copy of the notification issued by the Indian Army for the Judge/Advocate General post is also placed before us. On perusal of the same, it is seen that the maximum entry age has been restricted to 27 years. As stated by the party-in-person, if he is not permitted admission in this academic year, it could result in him being denied entry on account of him being over-age. The proceedings of the Government of Karnataka bearing No.ED/197/UNE/2020, Bangalore, Dated: 10.07.2020, is also placed before us.

¶45

We are of the considered opinion that paragraph No.2 clause (e) deals with the scheme of carry forward which reads as follows: (e) The scheme of “Carry forward” (for the subjects in which the student has failed) will be allowed for the current academic year in the universities and every student will be promoted to next semester/year. However, such students may clear

¶46

¶47

the examination for the course in which he/she has failed/remained absent, whenever the examination is held next.

¶48

All these measures have been enumerated by the Authorities in view of the pandemic that was rising across the country at that point of time and the pandemic still has a bearing across the country. It is common knowledge and is something which this Court can take judicial notice of, is that movement across the State borders were being restricted by the respective States in order to control the spread of pandemic.

¶49

In that view of the matter, we deem it appropriate to sympathetically view the case of the appellant/party-in-person. There can be no doubt that if the admission is postponed, the same could result in the appellant being prevented from realizing his dream of serving the Nation by joining the Armed Forces.

¶50

The Courts of law are required to do justice in its fullest sense. Though the order of the learned Single Judge has been rendered on a concession, we deem it necessary to entertain this writ appeal, as it is fairly conceded by the partyin-person that the appeal is not out of any complaint against the

¶51

¶52

order of the learned Single Judge, but that on account of nervousness and inadvertence that he had failed to place all the material and grievances before the learned Single Judge.

¶53

In these circumstances, we would have directed the party-in-person to approach the learned Single Judge by way of a review. But, keeping in view the fact that the last date for completing the admission process and for applying to take up examinations being on 22^nd February 2021, remanding or attempting to seek review might get prolonged and the very object of the appellant approaching, the Court might get defeated.

¶54

In that view of the matter, we entertain the writ appeal. In view of the above discussions, we deem it appropriate to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to grant admission to the appellant in the present academic year i.e. 2020-21. Further, the admission shall be forwarded to respondent No.1 and the appellant shall also complete all the necessary formalities without fail, at the earliest, to enable the respondents to complete the admission process and to issue hall-ticket. The 1^st respondent shall issue such orders and

¶55

¶56

documents as is necessary and to enable the petitioner to take up the examinations.

¶57

The appellant/party-in-person shall also deposit the entire fees and it is made clear that if he again raises any dispute, he will not be entitled to any benefit under this order.

¶58

Accordingly, writ appeal is disposed of.

¶59

Sd/JUDGE

¶60

Sd/JUDGE

¶61

Rahul S/O Lxman Bhojane v. Karnataka State Law University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul S/O Lxman Bhojane v. Karnataka State Law University

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddanagowda Patil Vs Sri.Vidyadhar Laxman Dodmani

Pradnya Bobbi D/O Manjunath Kashappa Bobbi Vs Sri Vinayak Garg

Gourish Gangaram Khemoji Vs Sri Vinayak Garg

Vijaylaxmi W/O Vittal Katwe Vs Dr. Vasant S/O Krishna Revankar

Vasanti W/O Suresh Anvekar Vs the Karnataka State Financial Corporation

Sureshkumar C. Jain Vs the Karnataka State Financial Corporation