HC rejects plea on law colleges’ irregularities

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Thursday dismissed a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking strict enforcement of the 75% attendance rule for law students in the colleges affiliated to the University of Mumbai (MU). The court refused to entertain the PIL, highlighting a lack of details to support the petitioner’s claims.

The petition, filed by Sharmila Ghuge, an assistant professor at SVKM’s Jitendra Chauhan College of Law, highlighted Ordinance 6086 of MU, which mandates a minimum attendance of 75% during lectures, practical sessions, and tutorials for all students. According to the rules, a student with attendance below 75% is not permitted to appear for examinations.

However, Ghuge’s petition claimed that law colleges under MU aren’t following this rule at present. She alleged that the attendance of most students is considerably lower, ranging between 0% to 30%. The primary reason behind this subpar attendance, according to Ghuge, is students securing internships and even employment while pursuing their law degrees. She claimed that colleges do not act against such students, which encourages them to further seek employment.

The petition, filed through advocate Shyam Devani, demanded that the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the University Grant Commission (UGC) take the appropriate disciplinary action against students and institutions found violating the attendance requirements in order to maintain the quality of legal education.

Ghuge also offered a few suggestions to the court, such as issuing a circular ordering colleges to comply with the attendance ordinance, having transparency in the defaulters list, and monitoring internship periods. She alleged that multiple students with 0% attendance are still allowed to appear for their semester examinations, against the rules.

“Such a system is in place for many years, which has decayed the teaching and learning process. It is totally against the high hopes of qualitative education and the future of the legal system of this country”, she argued.

However, the division bench of chief justice Alok Aradhe and justice MS Karnik dismissed the petition, observing the lack of structured details in support of the allegations put forth.

“We find that the petitioner has not given any particulars of the colleges nor the students who are being allowed to appear in exams without following the mandatory attendance,” the bench stated. It highlighted that Ghuge, being an employee at a law college under MU, has failed to present data even about her own college and has not named any student who has attended exams without complying with the mandatory attendance rules.

Mandating the need to present concrete information backing the issue, the court granted Ghuge the liberty to file a fresh petition after gathering the relevant information to support her allegations.