Mohan Tirakappa Kattimani vs The State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 6012 Kant

                              1




               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                       DHARWAD BENCH

          DATED THIS THE DAY OF 13TH DECEMBER, 2021

                           BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

               WP NO 104537 OF 2021 (EDN-ADM)

BETWEEN
MOHAN TIRAKAPPA KATTIMANI
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS,
OCC. STUDENT,R/O. NAVILUSARARU TOTA,
HALLIGERI ROAD,NIGADI VILLAGE,
TQ. DHARWAD,DIST. DHARWAD.
                                                ...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ARAVIND D KULKARNI, ADV.,)

AND
1 . THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
DEPARTMENT OF HIGH EDUCATION,
REPRESENTED BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
M S BUILDING,BENGALURU.

2 . KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
NAVANAGAR,HUBBALLI.

3 . THE PRINCIPAL, KPES LAW COLLEGE,
G M PATIL LAW COLLEGE,
D C COMPOUND,DHARWAD.
                                                 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.S.BETURMATH, ADV., FOR SRI.K.L.PATIL, ADV., FOR R2;
      SRI.B.V.SOMAPUR, ADV., FOR R3)

      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING ORDER
15/11/2021       REGARDING       THE     APPLICATION     REF
NO.LW002S210001817 OF THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE-D AND
CONSEQUENTLY, ALLOW THE PETITIONER S APPLICATION FOR ISSUE
OF ELIGIBILITY CERTIFICATE FOR PURSUING LAW GRADUATION.
                                 2




      THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

Petitioner's request for admission to Ist year LLB is

rejected on the ground that petitioner has completed PUC

without completing Ist year PUC. Hence, this writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that

issue involved in this writ petition was examined by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in writ petition No.25863/2019

disposed of on 4/11/2020 relying upon Division Bench judgment

of this Court in W.A.No.5142/2016 has held that when a

candidate has completed II year PUC then the candidate would

be eligible for pursuing LLB course without completing I PUC.

3. Learned counsel for respondent University and the

learned counsel for respondent No.2 College do not dispute the

aforesaid factual possession of law.

4. To maintain parity, this writ petition also requires to

be disposed off in the light of the order passed by the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in WP.No.25863/2019. Accordingly,

I pass the following:

ORDER

i) The writ petition is allowed.

ii) The 1st respondent is directed to consider

the eligibility of the petitioner for admission to I LLB

course in the light to the order passed by the

Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.5142/2016.

iii) The said exercise shall be completed

within a period of four weeks from the date of the

receipt of certified copy of this order.

Sd/-

JUDGE Vb/-