Tripura High Court
Sri Amal Chandra Das vs The Icfai University on 10 September, 2020
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WP(C) No.433/2020
Sri Amal Chandra Das
----Petitioner(s)
Versus
The ICFAI University, Tripura & others
-----Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. Sarkar, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : None.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
Order
10/09/2020
The petitioner pursued his LL.B. Degree course with respondent No.1, ICFAI University, Tripura and successfully completed the same including the internship in the academic year 2017-18. The petitioner also on demand of the university appeared in a supplementary examination which was conducted in the month of December, 2018 and duly cleared all subjects. He was issued a certificate on successful completion of LL.B. programme by the university under a provisional certificate dated 03.10.2019.
The petitioner thereupon applied to the Bar Council of Tripura on 01.11.2019 for enrollment as an Advocate. According to the petitioner, Page 2 of 3 Bar Council insisted that the petitioner should supply a Transcript Certificate from the university. The petitioner thereupon wrote to the university on 22.11.2019 and requested that he may be issued a Transcript Certificate. When the certificate was not issued, the petitioner sent a legal notice dated 28.01.2020. Since no reply was received by the petitioner, he filed this petition.
Notice was served to the respondents previously. Despite service of notice and few adjournments, no one appeared for the respondents, particularly respondent No.1. I have, therefore, heard the petition ex parte. Since there is no response from the respondents, I have no choice but to accept the averments made in the petition. Accordingly, it would emerge that though the petitioner had successfully completed his three year LL.B. Degree course conducted by the respondent No.1, he is unable to enroll himself as an Advocate since the Bar Council insists that the petitioner must produce Transcript Certificate from the university and the university has not supplied such document to the petitioner.
In the result, respondent No.1 is directed to provide Transcript Certificate to the petitioner within 4(four) weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Page 3 of 3
The petitioner has also made a prayer for compensation for his not being able to work as a lawyer for two years. Such prayer cannot be examined in a writ petition. This request is rejected.
Direct service of this order to respondent No.1 is permitted to the petitioner.
Petition is disposed of accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(AKIL KURESHI), CJ Pulak