Gauhati High Court Refuses Relief To Student Who Was Denied LLB Degree For Failing In 'Taxation Law'

"Since the petitioner had admittedly failed in a compulsory paper i.e. Paper XXXV (Taxation Law) and since he has not challenged the Academic Council Resolution and the Notification issued subsequently, he cannot file the present writ petition, for issuing direction to the respondent authorities to grant LL.B. Degree to him. Having appeared in all the 37 papers and having been failed in one compulsory paper he cannot challenge the process."

Factual Background:

The petitioner took admission in the three years LL.B. Degree course in the month of July, 2011, in Arunachal Law Academy. He passed 36 papers as per the Ordinance of Rajiv Gandhi University, Doimukh. The University had adopted one extra paper, as a result of which the total number of papers went up to the 37. The petitioner failed in the paper of Taxation Law in the 4^th semester and he availed the second chance, wherein also he failed to clear the backlog paper.

Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondent authorities to give one special chance to complete the said paper. However, the same was denied to him. He also approached the authority for revaluation of the paper in which he failed, but the same was also denied. The Bar Council of India had advised the Rajiv Gandhi University to adopt 33 papers since 2017, but till 2018, the prayer of the petitioner for granting LL.B. Degree by virtue of completion of 36 papers is denied. Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Court by filing the present petition.

Contentions of the Petitioner:

Mr. C. Modi, counsel for the petitioner, submitted that as per Ordinance of the Rajiv Gandhi University, Doimukh, there are 36 papers to be completed by the students to get the LL.B. Degree. Later, it included another paper of 'Drafting, Pleading and Conveyancing' in the syllabus of LL.B. three years Degree course. The petitioner completed all the 36 papers but, failed in one paper. Hence, as per the Ordinance, he has completed 36 papers, as such he is entitled to get the LL.B. Degree.

Contentions of the Respondents:

Mr. T. Gadi, counsel for the respondents, submitted that though the student of three years LL.B. Degree course are supposed to pass 36 papers as per the Ordinance, yet, as per the mandatory provision of the Bar Council of India Rule on Legal Education, the Board of Under Graduate Studies (BUGS) of law has recommended for inclusion of the paper of Drafting, Pleading and Conveyancing into the three years degree course. The meeting of the academic council held on 19.04.2011 had approved the said proposal, pursuant to which a Notification was issued dated 25.05.2011. As the petitioner did not challenge Bar Council Resolution and the aforesaid Notification, the instant petition cannot be maintained.

It was further contended that the petitioner had accepted the syllabus and the prospectus and thereafter appeared in all the 37 papers. As because he failed in one compulsory paper, he cannot file the present petition. Thus, he is not entitled to get the LL.B. degree.

Observations and Decision of the Court:

The Court observed that the petitioner having accepted the prospectus and syllabus, took admission in the three years degree course. He appeared in the examination of all the 37 papers. After failing in a compulsory paper (Taxation Law), he challenged the incorporation of the paper 'Drafting, Pleading and Conveyancing' in the syllabus. He had earlier accepted the inclusion of paper No. 37 in the syllabus and had passed in total 36 papers. Having been failed in a compulsory paper i.e. the paper XXXV (Taxation Law), the Court held that he is not entitled to the degree of LL.B., as he had not challenged the Academic Council Resolution dated 19.04.2011 and the Notification issued subsequently.

The Court further referred to the decision made in Madan Lal & Ors. v. The State of J&K & Ors., (1995) 3 SCC 486, wherein it was held that if a candidate takes a calculated chance and appears in interview, then only because the result of the interview is not palatable to him, he cannot turn around and subsequently contend that the process of interview was unfair or selection Committee was not properly constituted.

It also placed reliance on Om Prakash Shukla v. Akhiles Kumar Shukla & Ors., AIR 1986 SC 1043, wherein the Apex Court observed that when a candidate appears in the examination without protest, but when he finds that he would not succeed in examination, he files a petition challenging the said examination, Court should not grant relief in such a case.

Accordingly, the petition was dismissed.

Case Title: Shri Kipa Kaman v. Rajiv Gandhi University, Doimukh & Ors.

Case No.: WP(C) 320/2019

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Gau) 27

Judgment Dated: 19 April 2022

Coram: Justice Robin Phukan

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. C. Modi, Advocate

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr. T. Gadi, Advocate