Disclaimer: This has been reported after the availability of the order of the Court and not on media reports so as to give an accurate report to our readers.
Delhi High Court: In a writ petition, while considering whether a student pursuing the 3-year LLM course could be permitted to continue his studies despite substantial shortage of attendance, the Single Judge Bench of Jasmeet Singh, J., took note of the peculiar circumstances, particularly that the LLM classes were conducted at 12 noon and that students pursuing the 3-year LLM course were not required to suspend their Bar licence, permitted Petitioner 1 to continue with his course.
The petitioners were students pursuing the 3-year LLM course at the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. Petitioner 1, admitted in 2023, was not permitted to appear in the 2nd semester examination on account of shortage of attendance. Against the prescribed attendance requirement of 67.5 per cent, he had attended only 43.5 per cent of the classes.
The petitioners challenged the detention list dated 3 July 2024 and sought permission to appear in the 2nd semester examination, including re-examination/supplementary examination and issuance of fresh admit cards. Petitioner 1 explained that he was engaged in attending court proceedings and that the LLM classes were held at 12 noon, which coincided with court working hours.
The Court noted that the classes were admittedly conducted at 12 noon and that students enrolled in the 3-year LLM course were not required to suspend their Bar licence during the course.
The Court observed that “the very purpose of the LLM 3-year course is to enable students to continue practice before the Courts while simultaneously pursuing their Masters program”.
Further, the Court noted that Petitioner 1 was willing to execute a bond and affidavit and to make good the attendance shortfall in the succeeding semesters. He also undertook to clear any outstanding fee arrears.
The Court found the undertaking fair and considered it consistent with the objective of the 3-year LLM course. Consequently, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the Court permitted Petitioner 1 to continue with the LLM course.
Since no one appeared to represent the other named petitioners, the Court dismissed the petition as against them.
[Aditya Singh v. University of Delhi, W.P.(C) 9643/2024 & CM APPL. 23421/2026, decided on 13-8-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Petitioners: Mr Satyanarain, Mr. Arun Renu, Advs.
For the Respondents: Adv Mohinder Rupal Adv Hardik Rupal Adv Aishwarya Malhotra Adv Tripta Sharma for R1
Mr Dhruv Rohatgi PC GNCTD Ms Chandrika Sachdeva Mr Dhruv Kumars, Advs.
