Allowed

Darshan Kumar M H v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC11 Sept 2023WP/18322/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a writ petition seeking admission to a law college for the 2023-24 academic year. Directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's representation in light of a prior co-ordinate bench order recognizing ITI qualifications.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed; respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are directed to consider representations dated 03.06.2023 for admission to the 3-year LL.B. course for academic year 2023-24 and complete the exer

Darshan Kumar M H Vs the State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:32922 WP No. 18322 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 11^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO. 18322 OF 2023 (EDN-RES)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

DARSHAN KUMAR M H S/O HOBALAIAH, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/AT BILIDEVALAYA VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, KUNIGAL TALUK

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. RAVIKUMAR B R., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by R DEEPA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION VIKASA SOUDHA DR. B.R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI BANGALORE – 560001

¶14

THE REGISTRAR KARNTAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY HUBBALLI 580025.

¶15

VIDYODHAYA LAW COLLEGE TUMKUR 572101, TUMKUR TOWN TUMKURU REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. PRINCE ISAC, AGA FOR R1 SRI. SARITHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:32922 WP No. 18322 of 2023

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 AND 3 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION LETTER DATED 03.06.2022 VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND A2 ADDRESSED BY THE PETITIONER AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECT R2 AND 3 TO PROVIDE ADMISSION TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR 2023-24.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for mandamus directing respondent Nos.2 and 3 to consider the representation letter dated 03.06.2022 vide Annexures A1 and A2 addressed by the petitioner and consequently direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to provide admission to the petitioner for the academic year 2023-24.

¶23

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent- University.

¶24

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:32922 WP No. 18322 of 2023

¶26

3. The Co-ordinate bench of this Court in W.P

¶27

No.200642/2021 disposed of on 08.12.2021, wherein at para 8 it held as under:

¶28

"8. By bare reading of the Rules of Bar Council of India and the Regulations of the first respondent-University, it has to be held that a candidate to be eligible for admission to a three year Law Degree Course should have passed a three years degree program from a recognized University and that he should not have obtained 10+2 or graduation through an open University system. Neither the Rules nor the Regulations excludes ITI course in lieu of PUC or 11^th and 12^th standards when a student wants to get admitted to a three year Law Degree Course. When that being the situation, the first respondent-University in its notification for admission to three year Law Degree Course for the academic year 2020-21 cannot insist upon that the students should have only studied in Pre-University or 12^th standard. It should consider ITI course for two years as equivalent to Pre-University or 12^th standard. Further, the notification also does not expressly state that ITI is not equivalent +2. For the said reasons, it has

¶29

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:32922 WP No. 18322 of 2023

¶30

to be held that the second respondent has committed an error in not admitting the petitioner to the course of three year LL.B Degree programme only on the ground that he has not completed +2, but has studied ITI before obtaining a valid three year degree from a recognized University".

¶31

4. The Co-ordinate bench of this Court having held

¶32

that the petitioner therein having studied ITI before obtaining a valid 3 year degree from the recognized university was eligible for admission for 3 year LLB course. This writ petition is required to be disposed of in the light

¶33

of the order dated 08.12.2021 passed in

¶34

W.P No.200642/2021.

¶35

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶36

ORDER

¶37

The writ petition is allowed.

¶38

The respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consider the representations dated 03.06.2023 vide Annexures – A1 and A2 for admission to 3

¶39

¶40

NC: 2023:KHC:32922 WP No. 18322 of 2023

¶41

year LLB course for the academic year 2023-24. The said exercise shall be completed forthwith.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

SSB

Darshan Kumar M H v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darshan Kumar M H v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Shivalingamma Vs Smt Kamalamma

V N Rangaiah Vs the Chief Secretary

Smt Hayath Bee W/O Sadanahalli Jabar Sab Vs Smt Najamunnissa W/O Shafiullah

Karavali Ayurvedic Medical College Vs the Union of India

Dr. Bhargavi v Alva Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences

Dr Arjun Das Vs Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences