Dismissed

Jothi. M v. The Director of Legal Studies

Madras HC23 Dec 2022WP(MD)/29112/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ mandamus permitting her to appear for specific Supreme Court recommended paper examinations. The Court observed she commenced her course in 2007, outside the notification period (2009-2010 to 2016-2017). Consequently, the petition was dismissed with liberty to seek arrear examination in supplementary proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner not permitted to write the examination; liberty granted to approach for supplementary examination.

Jothi. M Vs The Director of Legal Studies — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED : 23.12.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶5

WP (MD)No.29112 of 2022

M.Jothi

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Director of Legal Studies, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai – 600 028.

¶10

2.The Controller of Examination, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai – 600 028.

¶11

3.The Principal, Government Law College, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to permit the petitioner to appear and write her TIB (new code TLB) – CRPC, Juvenile Justice Act and Probation of Offenders Act Examination to be held on 04.01.2023 on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 16.12.2022.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sarvagan Prabhu

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss for R1 and R2 Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate for R3

¶15

1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶18

2.The petitioner had joined B.L degree three years course in the year

¶19

She completed the course in the year 2010. But she had not passed certain subjects. She now wants to write one arrear examination. The learned standing counsel for the university points out that the present notification is meant to for the candidates admitted during 2009-2010 to 2016-2017. The petitioner's course period had commenced in the year 2007-08. Therefore, as rightly pointed out by the learned standing counsel for the university, the petitioner will not be allowed to write the arrear paper in the coming examination. The petitioner's right to write the petition mentioned arrear paper in the supplementary examination is left open.

¶20

3.With this liberty, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶21

23.12.2022

¶22

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No SKM

¶23

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

¶25

1.The Director of Legal Studies, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai – 600 028.

¶26

2.The Controller of Examination, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai – 600 028.

¶27

3.The Principal, Government Law College, Tirunelveli District.

¶28

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶30

skm

¶31

WP (MD)No.29112 of 2022

¶32

23.12.2022

¶33

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jothi. M v. The Director of Legal Studies

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jothi. M v. The Director of Legal Studies

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

R.Irulappan Vs The District Collecor

Thavayogi Gnana Theva Bharathy M Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Vijayalakshmi, Vs the District Collector

Ajin Vs The District Revenue Officer

Chidambaram. R Vs The Tahsildar

Susila Devi Vs The Thasildar