Karnataka High Court
Bangalore Institute Of Legal Studies vs The Bar Council Of India on 16 November, 2018
Bench: L.Narayana Swamy, H.P.Sandesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2018
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L.NARAYANA SWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH
WRIT PETITION Nos.48858-48875/2015
C/W
WRIT PETITION NOs.35853-35857/2015,
45977/2016, 29474/2015, 33754-33756/2014 &
34774-813/2014, 12255-12271/2009,
25763-25766/2009, 28524-28550/2009,
33334-33345/2009, 34493/2009, 3156/2010,
37283/2015
AND 58103-58122/2017 (EDN-AD)
In W.P. Nos.48858-48875/2015
BETWEEN :
BANGALORE INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL,
DR.SAPNA.S,
VIJAYA COLLEGE CAMPUS,
R.V.ROAD, BASAVANAGUDI,
BANGALORE - 560 004 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.H.R.NARAYANA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.C.M.NAGABHUSHANA, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
-2-
# 21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. THE KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY,
NAVANAGAR,
HUBBALLI - 580 025,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF
HIGHER EDUCATION,
M.S.BUILDING,
DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDI,
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE REVISED APPROVAL
LETTER DATED 31.10.2015 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR
OF THE R-2 (ANNEXURE-A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO
NOT APPROVING THE ADMISSIONS OF THE 18
STUDENTS FROM SL. NO.61 TO 78 AS PER PROFORMA
3A (ANNEXURE-G) AND ETC.,
In W.P. Nos.35853-857/2015
BETWEEN :
1. SARASWATHI LAW COLLEGE
C K PURA EXTENSION
CHITRADURGA - 577 501
-3-
REPRESENTED BY
ITS PRINCIPAL
SMT M S SUDHADEVI
W/O SRI H M SHIVAPRASAD
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT PRASAD NILAYA
3RD MAIN, 2ND CROSS
KELAGOTE, NEAR MUNICIPAL COLONY
CHITRADURGA - 577 501
2. K.L.E SOCIETY'S LAW COLLEGE
B K COLLEGE CAMPUS
CHIKODI - 591 201
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SRI VIJAY V MURADHANDE
S/O SRI VIRUPAKSH
AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT PRINCIPAL QUARTERS
B K COLLEGE CAMPUS
CHIKODI - 591 201
3. K.L.E. SOCIETYS' S. A.
MANVI LAW COLLEGE
P B NO. 82, J. T. COLLEGE CAMPUS
HATELGERINAKA
GADAG - 582 101
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SRI SANTHOSH PATIL
S/O SRI RAMACHANDRA PATIL
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
GANESH GUDI ONI
HATELGERINAKA
GADAG - 582 101
4. VIDYODAYA LAW COLLEGE
B H ROAD
TUMKUR - 572 102
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL (IN-CHARGE)
SRI A NARAYANASWAMY
S/O LATE PULLAIAH
-4-
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
R/AT AMARJYOTHINAGAR
TUMKUR - 572 102
5. R.T.E. SOCIETY'S LAW COLLEGE
DEGREE COLLEGE CAMPUS
P. B. ROAD, RANEBENNUR - 581 115
HAVERI DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
B.RAMESH
S/O BASAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
R/AT RANEBENNUR ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. M.S.PARTHASARATHI, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGAR
HUBLI - 20
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
M S BUILDING
DR AMBEDKAR VEEDHI
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
-5-
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF
MANDAMUS AND STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING
RULES FRAMED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN THE RULES
OF LEGAL EDUCATION, 2008
(1) RULE NO.28 SCHEDULE III
(2) RULE NO.5A SCHEDULE III
(3) RULE NO.7 CHAPTER II
(4) RULE NO.13 CHAPTER II
AN ILLEGAL, VOID AND INOPERATIVE AND FORBEAR
THE RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE SAID
PROVISIONS.
In W.P. No.45977/2016
BETWEEN :
1. PEOPLE'S EDUCATION TRUST (R)
BY SECRETARY OF
THE GOVERNING COUNCIL
MANDYA - 571 402
2. THE PRINCIPAL
P.E.S. LAW COLLEGE
MANDYA - 571 402 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR. H.B., ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF LAW, MINISTRY &
PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560 001
-6-
2. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
NO. 21, ROUSE AVENUE
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
3. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR
NAVANAGAR, HUBLI,
DHARWAD DISTRICT - 580 025 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R1;
SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3)
. . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING RULES FRAMED
BYTHE R-2 IN THE RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION 2008
1) RULE NO.28 SCHEDULE III
2) RULE NO.5A SCHEDULE III
3) RULE NO.7 CHAPTER-II
4) RULE NO.13 CHAPTER-II
AS ILLEGAL VOID AND IN OPERATIVE AND FORBEAR
THE RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE SAID
PROVISIONS IN SO FAR AS PETITIONER NO.2 IS
CONCERNED
In W.P. No.29474/2015
BETWEEN :
SRI DHARMASTHALA MANJUNATHESHWARA
LAW COLLEGE,
-7-
M G ROAD,
MANGALURU - 575 003
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
DR P D SEBASTIAN
S/O MATHAI DEVASIA ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.H.MALATESH, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGARA
HUBLI - 580 025
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BENGALURU - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.GANAPATHI BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
. . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH THE CONDITION IMPOSED BY R-2 VIDE
NOTIFICATION DATED 3.6.2015 VIDE ANNEXURE - C, IN
SO FAR AS IT PERTAINS TO REDUCTION OF INTAKE OF
STUDENTS FROM 80 TO 60 PER BATCH IN 5 YEARS LAW
-8-
COURSE AND IN THREE YEARS LAW COURSE IS
CONCERNED AND PERMIT THE PETITIONER TO ADMIT
80 STUDENTS PER BATCH IN THE LAW COURSES.
In W.P. Nos.33754-756/2014 & 34774-813/2014
BETWEEN :
VAIKUNTA BALIGA COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SRI PRAKASH KANIVE
AGED 53 YEARS
KUNJIBETTU
UDUPI - 576 102 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. N. RAVINDRANATH KAMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGARA, HUBLI - 580 025
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SMT.SARITHA KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
-9-
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO a. STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING RULES FRAMED
BY THE R-1 IN THE RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION 2008
VIDE ANNEXURE - A3
1. RULE NO.28 SCHEDULE III
2. RULE NO.5A SCHEDULE III
3. RULE NO.7 CHAPTER II
4. RULE NO.13 CHAPTER II
AS ILLEGAL, VOID AND INOPERATIVE AND FORBEAR
THE R-1 FROM ENFORCING THE SAID PROVISIONS IN
SO FAR AS PETITIONER'S COLLEGE IS CONCERNED AND
ETC.,
In W.P. Nos.12255-271/2009
BETWEEN :
1. VIVEKANANDA COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF K.B. KEMPE GOWD
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
BANGALORE - 21
2. V V PURA COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF HIMALAKSHI P K
SRIGANDADA KAVALU
OUTER RING ROAD
BANGALORE - 91
3. RAJIV GANDHI COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF M T MARISWAMY
1ST TEMPLE STREET, 11TH CROSS
KODANDARAMAPURA
- 10 -
MALLESHWARAM
BANGALORE - 03
4. R.K.COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF PREMALATHA
USHA MANSION 5TH CROSS
MALLESHWARAM
BANGALORE
5. TEACHER'S COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF G S SHANKRAPPA
S.J.E.S CAMPUS, OLD MADRAS ROAD
BANGALORE - 49
6. PANCHAMI COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF B.L.VIDYA
#271, 7TH CROSS, ANUBHAV NAGAR
NAGARBHAVI MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE - 72
7. ARUNODAYA INSTITUTE OF
LEGAL STUDIES
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF T K SHRIDEVI
NO.57, JANANABHARATHI POST
MARIYAPPANA PALYA
BANGALORE - 72
8. INDIRA PRIYADARSHINI COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF BHARATHI M.S.
NO.1, COLLEGE ROAD,
ALTUR, YELANKHA, NEW TOWN
BANGALORE - 64
9. BASAWASHREE COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF THONTABARYA WADEYAR
- 11 -
VINOBHA NAGAR, KNS POST
KOLAR
10. SESHADRIPURAM COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF ASHA A G
SESHADRIPURAM
BANGALORE - 20
11. KENGAL HANUMANTHAIYA LAW COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF V NAGARAJ
SRI KENGAL HANUMANTHAIYA
LAW COLLEGE
MARIKUPPAM
KGF - 563 119
12. SARVODAYA LAW COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF B V VENKATALAKSHAMMA
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
NO.17, III CROSS, I MAIN
YESHWANTHPUR
BANGALORE - 22
13. SHRI BALAJI COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF A.S. BHAGYASHREE
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS
NO.29/1, 17TH E MAIN, 72ND CROSS
V BLOCK, I FLOOR,
RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE - 10
14. BES COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF S M RAJANNA
BES COLLEGE OF LAW
16TH MAIN, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 011
- 12 -
15. KEMPEGOWDA COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF B G SHOBHA
B B ROAD,
CHICKABALLAPUR - 562 101
16. M H COLLEGE OF LAW
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF R ASHOK
PRINCIPAL, M H COLLEGE OF LAW
RAMANAGARA - 571 511
17. DR. R.M.L. LAW COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
DR. B. M. NAGARAJ
GOTTIGERE
BANNERGHATTA MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE - 83 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. PRAFULLA CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR
M/S. RAVIVARMAKUMAR ASSTS., ADVOCATES)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGARA, HUBLI - 580 025
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF
- 13 -
HIGHER EDUCATION
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHADEVI.M.P, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI.GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3
RESPONDENT 2 AND 3 ADDED AS PER
COURT ORDER DATED 25.08.2009)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING
RULES FRAMED BY THE RESPONDENT IN THE RULES
OF LEGAL EDUCATION 2008.
1. RULE NO. 28 SCHEDULE III
2. RULE NO. 5A SCHEDULE III
3. RULE NO. 7 CHAPTER-II
4. RULE NO. 13 CHP. II
AS ILLEGAL, VOID & INOPERATIVE AND FORBEAR THE
RESPONDENT FROM ENFORCING THE SAID PROVISIONS
IN SO FOR AS PETITIONERS ARE CONCERENED.
In W.P. Nos.25763-766/2009
BETWEEN :
1. HAVANUR COLLEGE OF LAW
HOYSALA NAGAR
BANGALORE - 16
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF. LAKSHMI DEVI
2. AL-AMEEN COLLEGE OF LAW
NEAR LALBAGH MAIN ROAD
HOSUR ROAD
- 14 -
BANGALORE - 27
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF. SHAGUFFA ANJUM
3. THE OXFORD COLLEGE OF LAW
1ST PHASE, J.P. NAGAR
BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
PROF. M. SEETHA LAKSHMI
4. DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR COLLEGE OF LAW
NO.38, THIRUMANAHALLI
HEGDE NAGAR MAIN ROAD
BANGALORE - 64
REPRESENTED BY ITS
VICE PRINCIPAL
PROF.M. JOTHI ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. S.PRAFULLA CHANDRA, ADVOCATE FOR
M/S. RAVIVARMAKUMAR, ASSTS., ADVOCATES)
AND :
1. UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF LAW & JUSTICE
NEW DELHI
2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRL. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
M.S. BUILDING
BANGALORE
3. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
NO.21, ROSE AVENUE
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
- 15 -
NEW DELHI - 110 002
4. THE KARNATAKA LAW STATE UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGAR
HUBLI - 580 020 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.SHASHIKANTHA, CGC FOR R1;
SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R2;
SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R3;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R4)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO STRIKE DOWN RULE 7 & 13 OF CHA-
II OF RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION - 2008 FRAMED BY
THE R3, AS PER ANNEXURE - B, IN SO FAR AS THE
PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.
In W.P. Nos.28524-550/2009
BETWEEN :
1. SRI.H S UMESH
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
S/O SIDDAGANGANNA
NO.870/C, 5TH BLOCK
17TH G MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 010
2. SRI. O RUDRANNA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
S/O DURGAPPA
NO.870/C, 5TH BLOCK
17TH 'G' MAIN, RAJAJINAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 010
3. SRI. D M RAMAKRISHNA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
- 16 -
S/O MARIYAPPA
NO.1073, 3RD MAIN
44TH CROSS, T DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE - 560 059
4. SMT. H K VIDYAVATHI
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
D/O KRISHNAPPA
NO.108/1, 7TH CROSS
LOWER PALACE ORCHARD
BANGALORE
5. SMT. B A SOWBHAGYA
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
W/O PRAKASH KUMAR
NO.18, 13TH CROSS
AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE - 560 079
6. SRI. G H RAMESH
AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
S/O HUCHAIAH
NO.35, 2ND CROSS
1ST 'L' MAIN ROAD
NAGARABHAVI II STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 079
7. SRI. R VENKATARAJU
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
S/O LATE RANGASWAMY
NO.26, SRIRANGA NILAYA
RAMOHALLI, KENGERI HOBLI
BANGALORE SOUTH TALUK
8. SMT. R REKHA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
D/O RAJAMARTHANDA D
NO.935, III MAIN ROAD
VIJAYANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560 040
- 17 -
9. SRI. B A KRISHNA KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
S/O ANJANAPPA
NO.18, 13TH CROSS
AGRAHARA DASARAHALLI
BANGALORE - 560 079 ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
NAVANAGAR
HUBLI - 20
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
BANGALORE - 560 001 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH RULE 28 OF SCHEDULE-III
AND RULE 7 OF CHP.-II OF THE RULES OF LEGAL
EDUCATION, 2008 FRAMED BY THE R1-BAR COUNCIL
OF INDIA AT ANNEXURE - G IN SO FAR AS THE
PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED.
- 18 -
In W.P. Nos.33334-345/2009
BETWEEN :
1. SURESH PADMANABAN
S/O D GOPAL,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NO.14, 4TH CROSS, LAKKASANDRA
BANGALORE - 560 030
2. T SEGAIMARAN
S/O THANDIAPPAN
AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
NO.18, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
BANGALORE - 560 068
3. K NAGALINGAM
S/O S KUPPAN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
NO.4, A NARAYANAPURA
K R PURAM
BANGALORE
4. A ELUMALAI
S/O K ARUMUGAM
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
NO.18, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
BANGALORE - 560 068
5. B G SREENIVASAN
S/O LATE B GANESHAN
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
NO.18, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
BANGALORE - 560 068
- 19 -
6. E BALAMURALI
S/O S ELUMALAI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NO.18, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
BANGALORE
7. B DURAI MURUGAN
S/O P M BALA SUNDARAM
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
NO.18, MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
BANGALORE - 560 068
8. T SURESH
S/O T DURAISWAMY
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
NO.13/2, 1ST FLOOR
C. K. C GARDEN
BANGALORE - 560 027
9. P SENTHIL KUMAR
S/O M P PANDIYAN
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
NO.13/2, 1ST FLOOR
C.K.C. GARDEN
LALBAGH ROAD
BANGALORE - 560 027
10. M SURESH KUMAR
S/O LATE P R MUTHUSUBRAMANIAM
AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
NO.13/2, C.K.C. GARDEN
BANGALORE - 560 027
11. B SARAVANA NATHAN
S/O K BALASUBRAMANIAN
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
NO.18, IST FLOOR,
MUNIREDDY LAYOUT
MADIVALA
- 20 -
BANGALORE - 560 068
12. G RAMESH
S/O LATE GOVINDASAMY
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
NO.4, A NARAYANAPURA
K R PURAM
BANGALORE ...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. S.NAGARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
NO. 21, ROUSE AVENUE
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
NAVANAGAR
HUBLI - 20
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
3. STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
BANGALORE - 560 001
4. INDIRA PRIYADARSHINI COLLEGE OF LAW
NO.1, COLLEGE ROAD
ATTUR POST
YELAHANKA NEW TOWN
BANGALORE - 560 106
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
- 21 -
SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3
R4 SERVED)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE R2 TO PERMIT THE
PETITIONER FOR ADMISSION TO THE LAW COURSE AS
PER ANNEXURE - A.
In W.P. No.34493/2009
BETWEEN :
SHRI M MUNIRAJU
S/O MUNIYAPPA
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
BEEDIKERE VILLAGE
THUBAGERE HOBLI
DODDABALLAPUR TALUK
BANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. B.N.MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
NAVANAGAR,
HUBLI - 20
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
- 22 -
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
TO GOVERNMENT
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
BANGALORE - 560 001
4. VIDYODAYA LAW COLLEGE
B.H.ROAD
TUMKUR - 572 102
REPRESENTED BY
ITS PRINCIPAL ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3
R4 SERVED)
. . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH RULE 28 OF SCHEDULE-III & RULE 7 OF
CHA.II OF THE RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION, 2008,
FRAMED BY THE R1, BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA AT
ANNEXURE - F TO THIS WP IN SO FAR AS THIS
PETITIONER IS CONCERNED.
In W.P. No.3156/2010
BETWEEN :
MR. SA. THI. SADASHIVA
S/O.S K THIMMAPPA
AGE 37 YEARS
NO.272, 8TH CROSS, "G" BLOCK
RAMAKRISHNA NAGAR
MYSORE - 570 022 ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE)
- 23 -
AND :
1. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE
INSTITUTE AREA
NEW DELHI - 110 002
2. THE PRINCIPAL
J. S. S. LAW COLLEGE
NEW KANTHARAJ URS ROAD
KUVEMPUNAGAR
MYSORE - 23
3. KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
HUBLI
REPRESENTED BY
ITS REGISTRAR ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R2 SERVED)
. . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO QUASH THE LETTER BEARING NO.JSSLC/66/(A)09-
10 DATED 12.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE - B.
In W.P. No.37283/2015
BETWEEN :
DAKSHINA BHARATH HINDI PRACHAR SABHA
KARNATAKA BRANCH,
DHARWAD - 580 001
BY ITS SECRETARY
- 24 -
SRI.K.VIJAYAN,
S/O SRI KANNANA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
DAKSHINA BHARATH HINDI
PRACHAR SABHA,
KARNATAKA BRANCH,
DHARWAD - 580 001. ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.M.S.PARTHASARATHY, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHAIRMAN/SECRETARY
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE,
INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
NEW DELHI - 110 002.
2. KARNATAKA STATE LAW
UNIVERSITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
NAVANAGAR,
HUBLI - 20.
3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION,
M.S.BUILDING,
DR.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BANGALORE - 560 001. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI. VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R3)
. . . .
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING
TO ISSUE AN APPROPRIATE WRIT, ORDER OR
- 25 -
DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND
STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING RULES FRAMED BY
THE RESPONDENTS IN THE RULES OF LEGAL
EDUCATION, 2008 (VIDE ANNEXURE - E).
1.RULE NO.28 SCHEDULE III
2.RULE NO.5A SCHEDULE III
3.RULE NO.7 CHAPTER -II
4.RULE NO.13 CHAPTER II
AN ILLEGAL, VOID AND INOPERATE AND FORBEAR THE
RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE SAID
PROVISIONS.
In W.P. Nos.58103-122/2017
BETWEEN :
SREE KRISHNA INSTITUTE OF LAW
MAHALAKSHMINAGARA BADAVANE
VALMIKHINAGARA
TUMKUR - 572 103
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL
SMT VINET VIMALA ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI.V.B.SIDDARAMAIAH, ADVOCATE)
AND :
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION
VIKASA SOUDHA
DR. B.R. AMBEDKAR VEEDI
BANGALORE - 560 001
2. KARNATAKA LAW UNIVERSITY
NAVANAGAR, HUBLI - 580 025
HUBLI TALUK, DHARWAD DISTRICT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
- 26 -
3. THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
NEW DELHI - 110 001
REPRESENTED BY
ITS SECRETARY ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.VASANTH FERNANDES, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. GANAPATHY BHAT, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SMT. GEETHADEVI M.P., ADVOCATE FOR R3)
. . . .
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES
226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
STRIKE DOWN THE FOLLOWING RULES FRAMED BY THE R-3
IN RULES OF LEGAL EDUCATION, AT ANNEXURE - E
SPECIFICALLY;
1. RULE NO; 28, SCHEDULE - III;
2. RULE NO. 5A, SCHEDULE - III
3. RULE NO.7, CHAPTER-II
4, RULE NO.13, CHAPTER-II;
AS ILLEGAL, VOID AND INOPERATIVE AND PROHIBIT THE
RESPONDENTS FROM ENFORCING THE SAID PROVISIONS.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS
DAY,NARAYANA SWAMY J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Learned Government Advocate, to take notice for the Education Department in all the petitions and is permitted to file memo of appearance in six weeks.
- 27 -
2. In two writ petitions, second set of papers have not been filed. However, since common facts and question of law are involved, we have perused the papers in petitions where second set has been filed. Hence, filing of second set of papers where they have not been filed, is dispensed.
3. The petitioners in all these connected petitions are the Law Colleges affiliated to the Karnataka State Law University, Hubli. The colleges are conducting 3 year and 5 year Law Courses. For the 5 years LL.B course, in order to impart the law education they are supposed to admit students as per the guidelines or directions issued by the Bar Council of India and directions of the Karnataka State Law University. Earlier the colleges were permitted to admit 80 students per class. This was amended by virtue of Schedule-III Clause 5A of Rules of Legal Education, 2008, based on the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India whereby the intake of 80 students per class has been reduced to 60 students. The Karnataka State Law University under Regulation No.9 stipulates that no College or Department of Studies in Law authorised to impart
- 28 -
education in the B. A., LL. B. course, shall admit more than 60 students in one division.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that restricting colleges to have intake of 60 students per division/class is unconstitutional and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Regulation No.5A of Schedule-III of the Bar Council of India Regulations contemplates that the Inspection Committee may approve for admission in each of the Section of a class for not more than 60 students . It further elaborates that a minimum of two sections in each class but not more than five sections in one class (such as First Year or Second Year or Third Year, etc) as the case may be unless there is any exceptional reason for granting more sections in a Class, may be approved. It is further submitted that the respondent - Bar Council of India and Karnataka State Law University have no jurisdiction and competence to restrict the intake of students. The Institutions should have the statutory right or fundamental right to run Institutions to impart education to various sections of
- 29 -
society and while doing so they have to fix the intake of the students and not the Bar council of India.
5. On admitting these petitions this Court had granted an interim order and protected the students who have been admitted over and above 60 students. They have almost completed the course and few of them are in final year of 5 year law course. In case, if the interim order is vacated by dismissing these writ petitions, the future of the students would be jeopardized. When the Bar Council of India and Karnataka State Law University have acted contrary to the Constitution of India, the intake restrictions is to be held as unconstitutional and the same is to be set- aside and further a direction is necessary to be issued to the petitioners - Education Institutions not to admit the students over and above 60 students. Earlier, these institutions were permitted to admit 80 students which has been later reduced to 60 students per division. By doing so, the respondents should have assigned reasons for its informality in reducing the intake of students, contrary to the interest of the Institution. The Institutions should have
- 30 -
been heard in the matter. For more than one reason the action of the respondents in restricting the intake of 60 students is arbitrary, unconstitutional and the same is liable to be set-aside.
6. The learned counsel for the Karnataka State Law University submits that the State Law University has carried out directions issued from time to time by Bar Council of India. In turn it is submitted that the Bar Council of India headed by the retired Judges of Supreme Court and Experts, in the best interest of the students the intake has been reduced from 80 to 60 students per division. Under these circumstances, since the Institutions have been affiliated to the State Law University, they have restricted these Institutions with a direction to admit only 60 students per division and wherever the admissions have been made contrary to the said intake, the affiliation has been cancelled.
7. Learned counsel for the Bar Council of India submits that on the advice made by the Rule Committee constituted for the purpose of framing the Rules, they have
- 31 -
recommended for reduction of strength of the students from 80 to 60. When the Rule Committee is constituted by the Bar Council, the advice made by the experts is followed. Under these circumstances, the rationality in reduction of intake from 80 to 60 students is not contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution.
8. The learned Government Advocate seeks to dismiss these petitions. In order to impart quality education, the aforesaid restriction is very much required. That was the directions issued by the Committee constituted by the Bar Council. The strength of the students depends upon the infrastructure provided by the Institutions which is suitable for 60 students. The reduction of intake is for suitability and also adequacy to impart better education. Hence, there is no violation.
9. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
10. The constitutionality of the Regulation passed by the Bar Council of India reducing the intake of students is
- 32 -
the subject matter. The petitioners have not made out their case to show that they have constitutional and statutory right to admit 80 students in their college. The Institution has been affiliated to the Karnataka State Law University and the quality of education ultimately depends upon the Bar Council of India Reports which are being issued from time to time. It is made clear that as per the Regulations of the Bar Council, the Rule Committee consists of retired Judges of the Supreme Court and also experts who have evaluated and examined the requirement to reduce the intake of students for quality education and on assessing the requirement, recommendation has been made to reduce the intake from 80 to 60 students. When an expert body is constituted and it made a report and that has been carried out by Bar Council of India, normally it is not open for the Courts to interfere with the decision taken by the Rule Committee. It is the Karnataka State Law University who has to regulate the Institutions and these institutions should invariably adhere to the decisions made by the Bar Council of India and Karnataka State Law University.
- 33 -
11. It is submitted by the petitioners, the impugned action violates Article 14 of the Constitution. What Article 14 of the Constitution stipulates is that no person shall be denied equality before law or equal protection of law. Thus all laws are in no way beneficial to the Institutions for the purpose of challenging the intake. Under the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution, arbitrariness is impermissible. Under this provision, the Bar Council of India has got jurisdiction to support the Karnataka State Law University and that is the Law University who has to ensure imparting quality education also. When that has been carried out by the respondents, the affiliated colleges have to invariably adhere in letter and spirit to the directions issued from the competent authority from time to time. Any admissions made by the Institutions contrary to the directions of the Bar Council of India is illegal. In case if it is found that any Institution admits the students over and above 60 students, the Karnataka State Law University and the Bar Council of India are empowered to cancel the affiliation given to the colleges.
- 34 -
12. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the interim order granted, the Students have been admitted and some of the students are in final year. On taking into consideration of the educational prospects of all these students and their career, we pass the following order:
The Students who have been admitted as per the interim order granted by this Court, only those students shall complete their course and Karnataka State Law University is directed to permit them to take up the examination and announce the results and issue marks card.
From this academic year onwards all the Institutions are directed to admit the students as per the directions issued by Bar Council of India and Karnataka State Law University strictly following the direction in letter and spirit.
13. In W.P. Nos.58103-58122/2017, students have been admitted over and above 60 up to 80 students. Only in the best interest of future of the students, they are
- 35 -
permitted for the academic year pertaining to which the students are admitted and they are entitled to complete the course.
Under these circumstances writ petitions are disposed of Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE SPS