The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea seeking to allow a 3-year law degree course after Class 12.

The petitioner withdrew his plea after a bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala expressed disinclination to entertain the matter. At the outset, the CJI commented that later someone might ask, why have a three-year course at all and allow practice of law right after high school.

Appearing for the petition Ashwini Upadhyay, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh contended that the 5-year duration for the LL.B course after school affects girl students. Countering the counsel’s submission, the Chief Justice said that more than 50 percent of students who are entering law school are girls and that 70 percent of district judiciary now are also girls.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh further submitted that the course duration affected poor children. Mentioning that in the United Kingdom the law degree is now having a duration of 3 years, the Senior Advocate requested that the Bar Council of India be asked to consider the petition as a representation.

Nonetheless, the Chief Justice reiterated the disinclination to entertain the matter. He remarked that according to him, even 5 years is too less. He pointed out that they need mature people coming into the profession. He also noted that the 5-year course has been very beneficial.

The Senior Advocate also requested that the petition be allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to approach the Bar Council. The Court, however, did not grant such liberty and just allowed the withdrawal of the petition.

The plea contended that the 5-year duration for the LL.B course is unreasonable and irrational. It sought direction to the Centre and Bar Council of India to form an Expert Committee to ascertain the feasibility of starting a 3-Year Bachelor of Law course after 12th Standard like Bachelor of Science, Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Art courses.

The petitioner contended that the students can easily study 15-20 subjects in 3 years, which means 6 semesters. Hence, the present duration of 5 years, that is 10 semesters for Bachelor of Law Course is unreasonable. He argued that the inordinate duration is arbitrary and irrational and hence violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

The Patna High Court rejected  a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed  seeking a direction to Respondent No. 1 (Chancellor of University) to consider his (Petitioner’s) representation seeking an exemption sought from attending the classes for the LLB course, since he is employed in the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya. 

The representation  demand that the Chancellor pass an order on his request for exemption after which he will seek admission to a college in any of the Universities within the State of Bihar for admission to the LLB course.

The petitioner is a Science Teacher in Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, District Garhwa, State of Jharkhand.

The Division Bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran and Justice Rajiv Roy said that the representation is misguided and there can be no consideration of the same. The further arguments are with respect to an R.T.I. application, which again cannot be sought to be agitated in a public interest litigation. 

The Court pertinently observed that there is no public interest either in the exemption sought for or the prayers made under the R.T.I. Act. The petitioner is purely raising a   personal issue; which also by the way the request is couched, is misconceived.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently dismissed a petition of a law student seeking a direction to appear in one paper of the LLB 5th Semester and thereby declare the result of 6th Semester LL.B Examination.

The Jabalpur Division Bench of Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav noted that the undisputed facts are that the petitioner was admitted to 3-year LL.B course in June 2015. The Ordinance 111 (Revised) framed under the impugned Vishwavidhalaya Adhiniyam in Clause ‘C’ and ’13’  prescribes a maximum period of 5 years within which the three year LLB course has to be completed.

The relevant Clause “c”and Clause “13” are as follows: “C. A student has to complete his course maximum in 5 years” 13. A student has to complete his course maximum in 5 year duration.”

It is observed by the High Court that for the petitioner, who was admitted in June 2015, the 5 years period expired in June 2020 but the petitioner could not clear all the papers. The University has withheld the result and has come out with a response that in view of the bar contained in Clause ‘C’ and ’13’ of the said Ordinance petitioner cannot now be permitted to complete the course.

Also Read: Kashi Vishwanath VIP darshan: Allahabad High Court dismisses petition against scheme

“From the pleadings, it is clear that failure of the petitioner to complete the said course was attributed solely to the petitioner and not to the University and therefore in the face of statutory bar (supra) no indulgence can be given by this Court in the present case. Petition fails and is dismissed as such,”

-the order reads.

The petitioner approached the High Court praying for the following reliefs :-

(i) To issue an appropriate writ directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in the one paper of LLB 5th Semester and thereby declare the result of 6th Semester LLB Examination. 
(ii) To issue any other writ order or direction which the Hon’ble Court deems fit under the prevailing facts and circumstances of the case and call for the records of the case in respect to the petitioner. 
(iii) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.

The Bar Council of India has clarified to the Bombay High Court that its June 9 circular will not affect the already published semester results of the LL.B course.

The Division Bench of Justice R.D. Dhanuka and Justice R.I. Chagla was hearing a petition filed by Layota Ferns, a final-year student of Government Law College, claiming that once the results are declared, they cannot be canceled and substituted with assignment-based evaluation. Moreover, without any online classes for students, they were asked to submit 10 projects within 21 days.

On July 26, the High Court was of the view that the University of Mumbai could not have withdrawn results already declared on May 22, 2020 in respect of various semesters referred in Circular dated 5th July, 2021 based on the directives issued by the Bar Council of India.

On Wednesday, Amit Sale, the Counsel for the Bar Council of India, informed the Court that the BCI undertakes that they do not propose to apply the decision recorded in the Bar Council of India’s Circular dated 9th June, 2021 and the press release dated 10th June, 2021 mandatorily requiring end term examination to be conducted by all the Law Colleges / Universities, with retrospective effect and will apply with prospective effect only and shall neither apply to, nor adversely affect the results declared prior to 10th June 2021, by the Law Colleges/Universities on the basis of previous semester scores, in accordance with UGC Guide-lines issued in April 2020. The statement is accepted.

Ashutosh M. Kulkarni, Counsel for the University of Mumbai, stated that in the event the Bar Council of India expressly undertakes before the High Court that the BCI’s circular dated 9th June 2021 and its press release dated 10th June 2021 mandatorily requiring end term examination to be conducted by all law schools/ universities shall have prospective effect and shall neither apply to, nor adversely affect, the results declared prior to 10th June 2021, by the law colleges/ universities on the basis of previous semester scores, in accordance with UGC guidelines, issued in April 2020, University of Mumbai will have no reservations nor objections in withdrawing its circular dated 5th July 2021 on Assignment Based Evaluation (ABE) for the Students of LL.B. (3 years) Semesters II and IV, LLB (5 years) and BBA LL B (5 years) Semester II, IV, VI and VIII. As a result, the schedule announced vide University Circular dated 5th July, 2021 would stand withdrawn and the results of Intermediate semesters declared in First Half 2020 announced earlier in August 2020 on the basis of average marks based on the scores of the previous semester and internal assessment as applicable, declared by the University vide Circular dated 22nd May 2020 would stand restored.

Results of all the semesters, which are referred to in the University Circular dated 5th July 2021 and for the examinations for the next class for which students have appeared, would be declared within two weeks along with the mark-sheets, Kulkarni added.

Also Read: Delhi HC tells NIA Court to hear bail plea of 60-year-old without delay

The Court while accepting the submission appreciated the stand at-least now taken by the University of Mumbai and Bar Council Of India.

“We hope that a large number of law students who have suffered mental trauma in view of the action of the respondents would be now relieved of such trauma,” the Court said while disposing of the petition.

It is pertinent to note that BCI in the circular dated June 9 announced that all promoted students will be declared ‘pass’ only if they appear for their final exam of the current semester in the next semester and directed colleges to hold an exam for the current semester in the next academic year.