Not Fair To Inform Student Of His Ineligibility At Fag End Of Course, Wastes Time And Money: Bombay High Court To Mumbai University
The Bombay High Court recently quashed Mumbai University's decision to declare a student as ineligible for the 3-year LL.B. course after he had already completed two out of six semesters.A division bench of Justice AS Chandurkar and Justice Jitendra Jain emphasized that the students must be timely informed of their eligibility status, to avoid students investing time, money, and energy in...
The Bombay High Court recently quashed Mumbai University's decision to declare a student as ineligible for the 3-year LL.B. course after he had already completed two out of six semesters.
A division bench of Justice AS Chandurkar and Justice Jitendra Jain emphasized that the students must be timely informed of their eligibility status, to avoid students investing time, money, and energy in a course only to be informed of ineligibility at a later stage.
“the University should inform the students about their ineligibility before allotting the seat in any college or at least before completion of Ist semester. It would not be fair to inform the student about his/her ineligibility at the fag end of the course since by then the student would have invested much time, money and energy in completion of the course. This would go a long way in resolving such an issue that comes before the Court time and again”, the court observed.
Rohan Thatte, in July 2021, took the State Common Entrance Test (CET) for the 3-year LL.B. course. He stated in his application that he had passed his B.A. exam with 45.15 percent in April 2020. After successfully clearing the CET in the "open category," Thatte secured admission to a college via the Centralized Admission Process (CAP).
The petitioner provided all necessary documents, including B.A. mark sheets, to the concerned authorities. The University confirmed his admission for the academic year 2021-22 based on the documents provided. However, on December 17, 2022, the University informed Thatte that he his ineligibility for the LL.B. course due to a shortfall in the required percentage as per Ordinance 0.05078.
The petitioner challenged this decision before the high court and, through interim court orders, was allowed to appear for semester III, IV, and V exams. He is currently in his final semester.
Rohan Thatte argued that the institution was unjustified in deeming him ineligible after completing the second semester. He contended that he had submitted all necessary documents and that Ordinance 0.05078 did not apply to his case, as the CET examination was conducted by the State, not the University.
He further emphasized a discrepancy in the interpretation of marks in his first-year B.A. mark sheet, asserting that this had led to the miscalculation of his overall percentage.
The University argued that Thatte had obtained 43.8 percent in his B.A. course, falling short of the required minimum of 45 percent for LL.B. eligibility. While acknowledging that the ineligibility notice came after seat allotment and at the end of the second semester, the University relied on Ordinance 0.05078 to justify disqualifying the petitioner.
The court found the situation akin to the facts in a previous judgment (Vinayak Uttam Hirave v. Ideal College of Law & Ors.) where a student was permitted to complete the LL.B. course despite similar circumstances. The court noted that the objection to eligibility was raised belatedly and, as a result, quashed the communication declaring Thatte ineligible.
Further, Ordinance 0.5078 applies to exam being conducted by Mumbai University whereas in the instant case, it is the State who has conducted CET and therefore, the said Ordinance is not applicable, the court observed.
The court ordered the University to allow the petitioner to complete his LL.B. course and directed the declaration of results for the withheld semesters.
Case no. – Writ Petition (L) No. 392 of 2023
Case Title – Rohan Ravindra Thatte v. University of Mumbai and Ors.