Telangana High Court
Gokapai Praveen Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 24 June, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY
WRIT PETITION NO.33826 OF 2023
ORDER:
This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed seeking to declare the action of respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein in issuing the impugned order holding that the petitioner is not eligible for exercising web options for admission into 3 years L.L.B Course on the ground of not meeting 10 + 2 + 3 pattern at the time of certificates verification status, despite qualified and secured rank in TS LAWCET - 2023 entrance examination, as being illegal, arbitrary, unjust, unconstitutional and consequently to set aside the impugned refusal order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.M.Mohiuddin, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.5.
3. The case of the petitioner is that he passed S.S.C examination in the year 1995 and later due to paucity of funds, he could not pursue further studies. While so, the petitioner came to know that the Government accorded permission for starting of Intermediate courses (+2) level 2 CVBR,J wp_33826_2023 through Open School System vide G.O.Ms.No.170, dated 04.09.2010 for the academic year 2010-2011. It is further case of the petitioner that pursuant to the said G.O., the petitioner appeared for public examination in the month of July, 2021 and secured admission into B.A Three Years Course from the School of Distance Learning and Continuing Education from Kakatiya University, Warangal, and successfully completed the same in the year 2018. It is further case of the petitioner that he intended to appear for LAWCET-2023 and submitted an application before the respondents and after verification of the same, the respondents issued Hall Ticket and date of examination was scheduled on 25.05.2023. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared for LAWCET entrance test on 25.05.2023 and secured 4330 rank and respondent No.4 also issued rank card and invited the petitioner for certificates verification.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he is qualified in the LAWCET entrance test and eligible to prosecute LAW Course, the respondents are not allowing him to exercise the web option on the ground that he is not 3 CVBR,J wp_33826_2023 meeting 10 + 2 + 3 pattern of education as per Bar Council of India Rules.
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4 has placed reliance on a Division Bench Judgment of this Court in W.P.No.45880 of 2022 and Batch, dated 20.10.2023, wherein the Division Bench of this Court, while dealing with Rule 5 of the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India for admission into Law Degree, held as under:
"22. This Court is in respectful agreement with the view taken0 by the Full bench of Madras High Court that candidates who do not fulfil the mandatory criteria under the explanation to Rule 5 of the Rules i.e., candidates who pursued their first degree through an Open University, cannot seek enrolment as an advocate.
23. In the fats of the present case, since the petitioners have completed 3 years L.L.B course without even fulfilling the eligibility criteria for seeking admission into L.L.B.Course, they can neither claim to be in a better position than the appellant in M.Naveen Kumar's case (4 supra) as it is not open for them to contended that they were not aware of the prescription /eligibility criteria specified under the Act before seeking admission nor claim any equities having pursued the course without meeting the eligibility criteria.
26. Before parting with the case, we wish to put on record that the Bar Council for the State of Telangana, is entrusted with the responsibility to implement the rules framed by the Bar Council of India relating to legal education are maintained. Needless to say that the State Bar Council is 4 CVBR,J wp_33826_2023 also conferred with the power to monitor and regulate the colleges wherein academic programmes of L.L.B are being provided. Thus, the Bar Council for the Sate of Telangana is expected to ensure that the colleges do not admit candidates who fail to fulfil the eligibility criteria into the courses of law, thereby unnecessarily creating a hope in such candidates of being eligible for registering on the rolls of the Bar Council and make a professional carrier for themselves at a later stage."
6. Admittedly, the petitioner stated to have successfully completed his S.S.C in the year 1995. Further, as per G.O.Ms.No.170, dated 04.09.2010, he completed his Intermediate from Open School Society (TOSS) in the month of July, 2021 and subsequently he secured admission into B.A Graduation Three Years Course from the School of Distance Learning and Continuing Education from Kakatiya University, Warangal and successfully completed the same in the year 2018.
7. The petitioner obtained Graduation from the School of Distance Learning and Continuing Education from Kakatiya University, Warangal. The Katatiya University, Warangal, does not have power to declare its degree as a recognised degree or equivalent degree. The power lies with the University Grants Commission only and no such equivalence certificate has been brought to the notice of this 5 CVBR,J wp_33826_2023 Court issued by the University Grants Commission, which is the Apex body in the matter of grant of recognition/equivalence in respect of degrees issued by various Universities under the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The controversy involved in the present case has been dealt with by a Full Bench of Madras High Court in G.S.Jagadeesh v. Chairman, Tamilnadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai 1, wherein the Division Bench held that a candidate seeking admission into L.L.B course is certainly required to possess a graduate degree as a regular candidate and therefore, the learned Single Judge after considering all the judgments on the subject was justified in holding that the petitioner does not fulfil the requisite qualification prescribed under the Rules framed by the Bar Council of India and has dismissed the Writ Petition.
8. Keeping in view of the Rules of Legal Education, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner herein has not fulfilled the eligibility criteria for admission into LLB Course provided under the Legal Education Rules framed by the Bar Council of India in exercise of powers 1 AIR 2018 Mad 243 6 CVBR,J wp_33826_2023 conferred by the Advocates Act. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for admission into three years LLB course.
9. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
___________________________________ JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY Date: 24.06.2024 YVL