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
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
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
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
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
AIR 2018 Mad 243
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
