Karnataka High Court
Sri Shanthanaraj R vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 April, 2025
Author: S.R. Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R. Krishna Kumar
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:13721
WP NO.7086 OF 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF APRIL, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.7086 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHANTHANARAJ R.
S/O. SRI. REGAI DURAI
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESIDING AT NO.43A,
HEAVY WATER PLANT COLONY,
MATHA KOVIL STREET,
THOOTHOKODI,
THOOTHOKODI DISTRICT,
TAMIL NADU - 628 007.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ARUN K S.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF LAW,
Digitally signed
VIDHANA SOUDHA,
by ARUNKUMAR BENGALURU - 560 001.
MS
Location: HIGH 2. THE KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
COURT OF
KARNATAKA NAVANAGAR,
HUBLI - 580 025.
REP. BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR.
3. THE REGISTRAR (ACADEMIC)
THE KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
NAVANAGAR,
HUBLI - 580 025.
4. THE PRINCIPAL
DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIA COLLEGE OF LAW,
NO.1 AND 2, GOTTIGERE (BEHIND BBMP OFFICE),
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:13721
WP NO.7086 OF 2025
BANNERGHATTA ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 083.
5. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
NO.21, ROUSE AVENUE INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
NEAR BAL BHAVAN,
NEW DELHI - 110 002.
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. B. SUKANYA BALIGA, AGA FOR R1;
SRI. GIRISH KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2 AND R3;
SMT. ANUBHA SRIVASTA, ADVOCATE FOR R5;
V/O DATED 14.03.2025, NOTICE TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH THE
IMPUGNED LETTER VIDE NO.KSLU/Reg/Acad-II/AdmsnAppr/2024-
5/2502 DATED 21.01.2025 VIDE ANNEXURE-N; ISSUE WRIT OF
MANDAMUS THEREBY DIRECTING RESPONDENT NOS.2 AND 3 TO
APPROVE THE ADMISSION OF THE PETITIONER TO 3 YEARS LLB
COURSE AND CONTINUE TO PURSUE HIS STUDIES IN
RESPONDENT NO.4-LAW COLLEGE; AND ETC
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING,
THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
In this petition, the peti8tioner seeks following relief:
"1. Issue a writ in the nature of Certiorari thereby quashing the impugned Letter vide No.KSLJU/Reg/Acad- II/AdmsnAppr/2024-25/2502 dated 21.01.2025 vide Annexure-N;-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:13721 WP NO.7086 OF 2025
2. To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus thereby directing the respondent No.2 and 3 to approve the admission of the Petitioner to 3 years LLB Course and continue to pursue his studies in Respondent No.4-Law College;
3. Pass such other further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant under the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity."
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned counsel for respondent No.1; learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3; and learned counsel for the respondent No.5 and perused the material on record.
3. In addition to reiterating the various contentions urged in the petition and referring to the material on record, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially admitted to the respondent No.4-College for three years LLB course as long back as in the year 2012-13, pursuant to which, the respondents 2 and 3 have issued the eligibility certificate in favour of the petitioner. It is pointed out that, at that point of time, respondents 2 and 3 did not inform the petitioner or state that the petitioner having undergone the foundation course from Annamalai University was not eligible for to take admission for three years LLB course on the ground that the foundation course was not equivalent to PUC / twelfth standard. It is further submitted that, -4- NC: 2025:KHC:13721 WP NO.7086 OF 2025 subsequent to the respondent No.4-College issuing Transfer Certificate to the petitioner on account of his discontinuation of three years LLB course, the petitioner intended to rejoin the course and consequently approached the respondent No.4-College for admission to three years LLB Course in Jul-Aug, 2024 and provisional eligibility certificate dated 22.08.2024 was issued in favour of the petitioner by the respondent No.2 who also issued Hall Ticket in favour of the petitioner for first semester examination conducted during Jan-Feb, 2025.
4. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that, despite the aforesaid facts and circumstances, immediately the respondents themselves admitting that the petitioner was eligible to get admitted to the three years LLB course earlier, respondents 2 and 3 issued the impugned communication dated 21.01.2025 (Annexure-N), refusing the approval in favour for the petitioner for admission to three years LLB course by passing a cryptic, non-speaking, un-reasoned and laconic order without application of mind and without assigning the cogent or valid reason for the same and as such, the petitioner is before this Court by way of present petition.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.5-Bar Council of India and learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3-Karnataka State Law University jointly submit that the foundation course undergone by the petitioner at Annamalai University was not equivalent to 10+2 -5- NC: 2025:KHC:13721 WP NO.7086 OF 2025 standard, which is a minimum basic qualification under Rule 5 of the Bar Council of India Part-IV Rules of Legal Education as well as order dated 20.11.2017 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu and therefore there is no merit in the petition and same is liable to be dismissed.
6. Though several contentions have been urged by both the sides in support of their respective claims, a perusal of the impugned letter/communication will indicate that, except stating that the foundation course undergone by the petitioner at Annamalai University is not equivalent to PUC+2 in the Remarks column, the respondents have not stated anything else as to why the request of the petitioner for approval was not being granted. In other words the impugned communication, being a cryptic, un-reasoned, non-speaking and laconic without assigning valid or cogent reason thereby, violating principles of natural justice, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned communication at Annexure-N dated 21.01.2025 issued by respondents 2 and 3, deserves to be set-aside and matter be remitted back to the respondents 2 and 3- Karnataka State Law University for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law.
7. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) Writ Petition is allowed;-6-
NC: 2025:KHC:13721 WP NO.7086 OF 2025
ii) Impugned communication/letter at Annexure-N dated 21.01.2025 issued by respondents 2 and 3-Karnataka State Law University is hereby set-aside;
iii) Matter is remitted back to the respondents 2 and 3- Karnataka State Law University to consider the case of petitioner for approval to the three years LLB Course afresh in accordance with law;
iv) The petitioner is directed to appear before the respondents 2 and 3-Karnataka State Law University on 28.04.2025;
v) Liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioner to submit his pleadings, documents etc., and the respondents 2 and 3 shall hear the petitioner and take appropriate decision / pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of one month from 28.04.2025.
SD/-
(S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR) JUDGE ARK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14