Madras High CourtWP/20217/2023dismissed

S.Malathi v. The Secretary

2024-04-01Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 01.04.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM S.Malathi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Secretary, Law Department, Secretariat, Chennai-09.

2. The Registrar, University Of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai-05.

3. The Controller Of Examinations, University Of Madras, Chennai-05.

4. The Registrar, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai-600 028.

5. The Controller Of Examinations, The Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, Chennai-113.

6. The Principal, The Central Law College, Yercaud Main Road, Kannankurichi, Salem 636 008.

... Respondents 1/6

Prayer :- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records relating to the Impugned Order in C. No. 212/ REGR/ ACAD/ A3/ 2022 dated 06.06.2023 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 4th respondent based on the resolution passed in the 8th meeting of the Syndicate as per the guidelines of University Grants Commission to permit the petitioner to complete the final year class of the B.L. Degree (5 years) Integrated Course and also based on the letter of the 6th respondent dated 29.11.2022 within the time frame fixed by this Honourable Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arokia Mani Raj For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate (for R1);

Ms.A.Shabnam Banu (for R2 & R3);

Mr.Arun Kumar Rajan (for R4 & R5);

Mr.A.Tamilvanam (for R6).

ORDER

The proceedings of the Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, dated 06.06.2023, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2/6

2. The petitioner underwent law course in Madras University in the year 1997 and after constitution of Dr.Ambedkar Law University, the petitioner did not continued her legal education. The petitioner admittedly secured her transfer certificate from the 6th respondent law college in the year 1999 and discontinued her law course.

3. Now after a lapse of about 23 years, the petitioner made an application seeking re-admission in the law course. The 5th respondent, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, rejected the claim of the writ petitioner on the ground that she had obtained the transfer certificate from the 6th respondent college as early as on 10.07.1999 and she is no longer a student of the college concerned. Therefore, she is not eligible to seek readmission in the law course.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner completed her exam papers in the year 1999 and now she is willing to pursue the law course. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent opposed the contention by stating that the petitioner is no longer a student and readmission can be granted only within the permissive period as per the U.G.C. regulations. Since the permissible 3/6

period lapsed long back, the petitioner is not entitled to seek readmission to law course.

5. This Court is of the view that the claim of the petitioner is stale and if at all, she is willing to pursue the law course, she has to secure fresh admission in accordance with law.

6. With these observations, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 01.04.2024 Index : Yes Speaking Order (sha) 4/6