23 Yrs Later, Gujarat Court Grants Relief To Man Who Was Denied LLB Admission For Being A Year Short Of 15-Year Student Period Rule

The Plaintiff aggrieved by the rejection of his admission instituted a suit in 2001 before the civil court.

Dealing with the issues regarding the completion of the Mohata's H.Sc. and graduation, the City Civil Judge Bhavesh K. Avashia in his November 16 order examined the mark sheet and degree certificate submitted by the plaintiff and noted that he has successfully established that he has passed out his H. Sc. in 1976 with Second Division and the B. Com Degree Examination with Second Class, after noting that the defendants have neither taken pain to cross-examine the plaintiff nor they have produced any rebuttal evidence to disbelieve these documents.

"In absence of any contrary evidence, it can be said that plaintiff has successfully established that he had passed out the B.Com Degree Examination and he had obtained valid Commerce Graduate Degree," it said.

Further, dwelling into the issue regarding procedural fees and his entitlement to get the injunction the Court noted that the plaintiff could not provide admission form that is required at the time of the fee payment and did not call any witness to prove the claim at the time of trial and hence, it weakens his claim.

On the defendant's objection to the plaintiff not completing 15 years of study before applying for admission for 3-year LLB, the court said that "defendants have not taken care to remain present before this Court, and therefore, this Court has to believe plaintiff's contention true and except this 14 years study and 15 years study no other hurdle came in way of the plaintiff to get admission in 3 year LL. B. Course".

It further said that the general criteria to get admission in 3 year LL.B Course, a student should posses the any Bachelor's Degree from the recognized university irrespective of the numbers of the years spent as a student life. It thus said that the plaintiff had a “Bachelor of Commerce Degree” from the recognized university - “Calcutta University”.

Allowed the suit the court said, “Hence, in the light of above discussions, I am of the view that the plaintiff is entitled to get the injunction as sought for. Therefore, my answer for the Issue No.5 is in Affirmative and in the interest of the justice, I pass the following final order for the Issue. The present suit preferred by the plaintiff is hereby allowed. The defendants are hereby directed to enrol the plaintiff viz. Shashi Kumar Mohata in 3-year LL. B. Course from the next academic year i.e. 2025-26”.

The Court then issued the conditions to be followed:

• The plaintiff is to produce original mark-sheets and degree certificates within one month of the order to the defendants for verification,
• The defendants to verify the documents submitted by the plaintiff with the admission form and take appropriate action in case of discrepancies including denying the admission to the plaintiff,
• The plaintiff to comply with the formalities to enrol as students in the college of the defendant,
• The defendant to not deny the admission to the plaintiff on the ground that he has studied for 14 years and not completed 15 years as a student,
• The defendant to bear the cost of the suit by plaintiff

The Plaintiff contended that as he was involved in investment business and therefore wanted to study and understand the legal aspects of the investment activities. He then argued that the Constitution of India does not permit discrimination on the ground of technicalities for admission to educational institution and that the University is unfair in enforcing such rules leading to violation of his right as he is entitled to study anywhere in India. Further, he submitted that he never received the receipt of the admission fees he paid at the time of enrolling into the 3-year LL. B program and tried to settle the matter amicably, failing to get the desired legal remedy, he instituted the suit in 2001. He then stated that in 1987-88 he took admission after completing the procedural requirements into Navgujarat Law College, college of defendant no. 1 but had to leave to focus on his business. The plaintiff then contended that he was the student of defendant no. 1 and cannot be denied admission to LL. B course now. The plaintiff then prayed the court to declare his right to get admission into the LL. B classes and appear for the examinations without the technical hindrances.

Case Title: Shashi Kumar Mohata v/s Gujarat University and Anr

Click Here To Read /Download The Order