Madhya Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Sanjay Yadav and B.K. Shrivastava, JJ., dismissed a writ petition which was filed against non-grant of permission to appear in the Sixth Semester Examination of Bachelor of Law (Hons) Three Year Degree Course.
The petitioner had taken admission in academic year 2014-15. As per ordinance No. 111 relating to LLB (Hons.) 3 year course there is a set eligibility pattern that needs to be complied with in order to appear in the exams, the petitioner who took admission in academic year 2014-15 was under an obligation to complete the course maximum in five years, i.e., in 2019. The pleadings revealed that the petitioner had not appeared in Sixth Semester Examination in the year 2018, but had appeared in the year 2019 but failed in Two Subjects. The petitioner then sought permission to appear in the Sixth Semester Examination in the year 2020 which is declined on the anvil of the stipulations contained in Ordinance 111.
The Court while dismissing the petition held that the relief sought by the petitioner cannot be granted relying on Ordinance 111 and various Supreme Court decisions like the one in A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society Etc. v. Government of Andhra Pradesh, (1986) SCC 2 667, the Supreme Court had held “We cannot by our fiat direct the University to disobey the statute to which it owes its existence and the regulations made by the University itself. We cannot imagine anything more destructive of the rule of law than a direction by the court to disobey the laws”. [Ravi Sharma v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2020 SCC OnLine MP 1627 , decided on 28-07-2020]