National Law University Delhi Mandatory Attendance: Delhi High Court on Monday expressed a preference for lowering of base attendance percentage standards of 70 per cent for laws courses and asked for the stand for the Bar Council of India.
A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma noted that in order to expand their experiences students interned with advocates as well, and told the learned counsel stating that classes were often not conducted due to lack of attendance by teachers.
Table of Contents
National Law University Delhi Mandatory Attendance in Law Courses
The bench replied that the BCI as the regulatory authority of the discipline should consider actual practicalities in the field of Law and then devise rules regarding the attendance of Law courses.
The baseline could be 40 per cent They can add onto it with certificates . Many classes end before 1 or even 2 pm. They can learn hands-on. Baseline should be lesser. ”If it is an exam you can’t stop it in any case,” it said.
Attendance of law students
Attendance of law students: The court said that while it did not dismiss the fact that currently there exists a purported BCI circular that sought to enforce the use of biometrics and CCTV for marking the attendance of law students, it called for this as “completely far from reality”.
It also said that any attendance requirement that debarred a student was in cases where it was against the student interest and requested the BCI to avail the material that provoked the increase of the baseline attendance from 66 per cent to seventy percent.
Student interest of course plays a crucial role and the regulator must also bear in mind what the student wants, what he is thinking. I am sure the regulator cannot be unaware of what is going on on the ground. That is why there always has to be a justification. Why is it 70 per cent?” the court said.
It requested the BCI to review the hypothesis of declining baseline attendance with reference to three-year and the five- year law course.
While of passing this order, the court was hearing a petition in relation to the suicide of law student Sushant Rohilla in 2016 for being stopped from attending the semester examination for lack of attendance.
On August 10, 2016, Rohilla a third year law student of Amity, died by hanging at his home because after his college withheld him from sitting for the semester exams over inadequate attendance.
The present petition was filed by this court in September, 2016, after the incidence but was referred to the high court in March, 2017.
The court raised its concern with regards to a BCI circular in regard to biometrics and CCTV for marking attendance of the student of law both of which the court stated was “completely far from reality”.
It also said any attendance requirement that debarred a student was against the students best interest and called on the BCI to provide the material used to increase the baseline attendance from 66% to 70%.
The regulator should always remember what the student needs, what the student is considering.. There is no way the regulator will be ignorant of what is going on on the ground. That is why the result has to be justified. Why is it 70 per cent?” the court said.
Mandatory Attendance Policy of Delhi Colleges & Universities
Previously the court stated that there is an urgent need to reconsider the norms that require mandatory attendance to colleges and universities as major teaching strategies have changed after the COVID-19 pandemic.
Regarding attendance policy, it said the mental health of students cannot be overemphasised and wanted institutions to rethink on what they are currently implementing in their institutions of learning due to COVID-19 pandemic.
This present petition was commenced by the Supreme Court in September of 2016, after the above occurrence but was transferred to this high court in March, 2017.
The court had earlier remarked that there existed an urgent need to reconsider the operational rules regarding the mandated attendance standards in colleges and universities in view of the drastic changes in the teaching modalities following the COVID-19 pandemic.
On attendance policies, it said, while formulating policies for consideration of exigent circumstances that affect students or require them to attend institutions, there is a need to consider their state of mental health.
The matter would be heard in February, 2025.
For more updates follow: Latest News on NEWZZY
