The Karnataka High Court Bench comprising Justice Hemant Chandangoudar quashed the notification issued by Karnataka State Law University by which it was to conduct offline examinations for the students of the 2nd and 4th semester of three year LLB course.
Background of the Case
Petitioners are students pursuing second and fourth semesters in three years LL.B course in the respondent College. Petitioners are aggrieved by the notification issued by the respondent University for conducting examinations to the students of second and fourth semesters for three-year LL.B course have filed this writ petition.
The University Grant Commission (for short `UGC’) had issued guidelines on the examinations in view of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in April 2020 exempting conducting examinations for the intermediate semester students and their valuations would be based on the marks obtained in the previous years. However, the Bar Council of India issued an advisory insisting on conducting examinations even for students of intermediate semesters which was challenged before this Court.
This Court by order dated 8.2.2021 quashed the press release dated 1.11.2020 issued by the Bar Council of India and so also the circular issued by the respondent – University on the ground that the guidelines were issued by the Bar Council of India without obtaining the opinion of the Expert Committee and also directed the respondent – University to promote the students pursuing intermediary courses in Law, based on their previous performances. This order had attained finality.
The Bar Council of India constituted a committee so as to furnish an opinion as to whether it is feasible to conduct the examinations for law students across the country. The Bar Council of India on the opinion furnished by the Expert Committee issued a press release dated 10.6.2021 (Annexure-H) accepting the report of the Committee in which it was opined that respective Universities shall conduct examinations for intermediate and final year students as per their own dispensation, depending upon the availability of resources and impact of COVID – 19 in that region. It was further opined that the respective Universities are free to determine the mode of examination [Online/Offline/Blended/Online Open Book Exam (OBE)/Assignment Based Evaluation (ABE)/Research papers].
Pursuant to the advisory issued by the Bar Council of India, the respondent – University issued the impugned notification for conducting examinations to all the semesters of three-year LL.B course as well as five-year LL.B course. The petitioners aggrieved by the decision of the respondent University for conducting examinations have filed this writ petition.
Heard Sri Dayanand Bandi learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Udaya Holla, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of Sri K.L. Patil, learned counsel for the University and Sri Sridhar Prabhu, learned for Bar Council of India.
The UGC issued guidelines on the examinations in view of the COVID-19 pandemic in July 2021 wherein the examinations for intermediate semester/year students was dispensed with and students were promoted to the next semester based on the internal evaluation and previous semesters as suggested in 2020 guidelines. However, the guidelines regarding the conducting of examinations were subject to advisories/directives to be issued by the other statutory bodies including the Bar Council of India.
The Bar Council of India after constituting an Expert Committee and after obtaining its opinion decided to conduct examinations for intermediate and final year students. However, the respective Universities were given free hand to determine the mode of examination through Online/Offline/Blended/Online Open Book Exam (OBE)/Assignment Based Evaluation (ABE)/Research papers. The Bar Council of India being the Regulatory Body for all the Law Universities affiliated to it was well within its power to issue the said advisory/direction.
Pursuant to the advisory issued by the Bar Council of India, the University took a decision to conduct examinations for all the semesters including the final semester. The University, having been given free hand to determine the mode of examinations, was under an obligation to take into account all the relevant factors for conducting examinations in view of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The University had produced the proceedings of the Expert Committee dated wherein the Expert Committee took a unanimous decision to conduct examinations through offline mode only.
The Expert Committee discussed all the issues and difficulties involved and resolved the following:
"1. Based on the analysis of the data received from the Colleges and Students it was resolved that the students from Rural Colleges are not able to attend online mode of examination due to problem of electricity and other technical issues like internet, Battery Backups etc., If examinations are held online it will cause injustice to those students.
2. Since the Government of Karnataka has also issued the order for reopening of Schools and Colleges by following Covid-19 guidelines. Therefore it was resolved that the offline mode of conduct of examination is better.
3. As per the Government Order students from other States who cannot travel, an opportunity may be given to them to appear for the next examination as a fresh candidate. No Examination fee shall be collected for the next examination if already fees have been paid.
4. Hence, considering the above reason, upcoming examinations shall be conducted offline mode only.”
An analysis of the proceedings indicated that the Expert Committee resolved to conduct examinations through offline mode only, by collecting data from the respective Law Colleges with regard to feasibility in conducting examinations through online mode. The data collected reflects that the majority of the students do not possess laptop or desktop computers and also do not have internet facilities. The Committee was required to consider not only the feasibility to conduct examinations, but also was required to determine the other mode of examinations, that is, open-book exam and assignment based evaluation/research paper. However, the Committee has not taken into account, whether effective education was imparted to the students including the petitioners which is probably the most important relevant factor. The Committee without taking into account the relevant factor has resolved to conduct examinations.
Order of the Court
The court in its order took note of the fact that the duration of each semester was for a period of four months. Admittedly, the classes for respective semesters commenced from 3.5.2021 onwards through online mode and the University directed all the affiliated Law Colleges to conduct the offline classes from 26.7.2021 and the semester concluded by end of August 2021. The lockdown was announced in the State of Karnataka with effect from 26.4.2021 for a period of four weeks and the University directed the affiliated Law Colleges to commence online classes from 3.5.2021 which admittedly was during the lockdown. 13. The data collected by the University indicates that more than 50% of the students do not possess laptop/desktop computer and also do not have an internet connection and the online classes are alleged to have been conducted from 3.5.2021 till 26.7.2021 i.e. for a period of three months and duration of the semester is admittedly four months. However, no data were collected by the University as to whether effective education was imparted through online and offline classes. In the absence of the same and also going by data collected by the University which indicate the majority of the students did not possess the laptop/desktop and also do not have access to internet facilities, it is implied that effective education was not imparted to the petitioners as well as the majority of the students. The Petitioners in paras 3 to 5 of the memorandum of writ petition have specifically pleaded that effective education was not imparted.
Taking into consideration the fact that the classes through online mode were alleged to have been conducted for a period of three months, it was implied that the petitioners did not have access to the library which is a storehouse of knowledge and the library helps the petitioners to perform better during examination by reading various books.
In the normal circumstances, the petitioners were under an obligation to attend the classes through offline mode so as to be educated and be prepared for appearing in the examinations. In the present scenario, the petitioners have not been imparted with effective education so as to be prepared for writing the examinations. The petitioners who are not prepared for no fault of theirs cannot be compelled to appear in the examinations with fear in their mind that they would fail in the examinations.
The Bar Council of India accepted the order passed by this court directing the University to promote the students based on their past performance cannot now contend that the degrees of the students who have been promoted will not be accepted and the same is untenable.
The court said that,
“In view of the preceding analysis, I am of the considered view that effective education was not imparted to the petitioners and also majority of the students and the University by not taking into account this most important factor has taken a decision to conduct examinations which is prejudicial to the interest of the petitioners and they cannot suffer for no fault of them”.
The writ petition was allowed and it was held that,
“The impugned notification dated 22.09.2021 issued by the respondent No.2 and also subsequent notification dated 01.12.2021 issued by respondent No.3 insofar it relates to conducting of the examination for the students of 2nd and 4th semester of three year LLB course are hereby quashed.
Respondent No.2 University is directed to promote the petitioners to the next semester in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.14389/2020 disposed of on 08.02.2021. It is made clear that this order is restricted to the students of the three year LLB Course”.
Case Details
Case Title: Mahanatesh v. State of Karnataka
Bench: Justice Hemant Chandangoudar
Picture Source :
