High CourtsSingle Bench(2022) 02 KAR CK 0032

Rishab Trakroo & Others vs State Of Karnataka

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 17 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Krishna S.Dixit, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 521 Of 2022 (EDN-RES)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 375 words

Krishna S.Dixit, J

1.

Petitioners â€" law students are knocking at the doors of Writ Court with the following prayers:

“I. A writ of mandamus directing the 2nd Respondent to adopt necessary steps to culminate the academic year and to start the next

academic calendar without any further delay or discontinuation for whatever reasons.

II. A writ of mandamus or any other direction or orders to impart required education as per the rules of 3rd and 4th Respondent and not to

lengthen the academic calendar beyond what has been directed by the 4th Respondent.

III. A writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 2nd Respondent to complete the 5 year LL.b course in strictly 5

years and to complete 3 year LL.b course in strictly 3 years time period without any further delay, for whatsoever reasons.

IV. A writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 4th Respondent to take necessary & disciplinary action against

the 2nd Respondent for the current delay & to enforce the 2nd Respondent to complete the 5 year LL.b course in strictly 5 years and to

complete 3 year LL.b course in strictly 3 years time period as per the academic calendar and schedule of the 4th Respondent, without any

further delay for whatsoever reasons.

V. Issue other appropriate writ or orders or directions to the respondents as this Hon’ble High Court deems fit and proper in the facts

and circumstances of this case and in the interest of justice and equity.â€​

2.

Learned HCGP on request appearing for the first respondent points out that the prayers essentially relate to the domain of academics and therefore,

in view of decision of the Apex Court in B.C. MYLARAPPA ALIAS DR.CHIKKAMYLARAPPA V. DR. R. VENKATASUBBAIAH &

OTHERS (2008) 14 SCC 30,6 ordinarily, the Writ Court should not grant indulgence in such matters; this court is broadly in agreement with the

submission of learned HCGP.

Writ Petition therefore is disposed off without granting indulgence; however, this order shall not come in the way of University considering

representations if petitioners file afresh. All contentions in that regard are kept open.

Registry to send a copy of this order to the respondent-University immediately by Speed Post.