IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NOs.47540-47541 OF 2017 (EDN-EX) BETWEEN 1. Vinaya D/o. Sangeeva Poojary, Aged about 33 years, Student of Vaikunta Baliga College of Law, (Registration No.30110101022), Barud Compound, Near New Janatha Store, Shirva Post and Village, Udupi Taluk.
2. Sadananda S/o. Mahadavaiah, Aged about 37 years, Student of SBBR Mahajana Law College, (Registration No.41910101037), Saraguru Hobali, Heggadadevanakote Taluk, Eiture, Kunthanabelathure, Mysuru, Karnataka-571125. ... Petitioners (By Smt.Mohanakumari .B.V., Advocate) AND 1. The Karnataka State Law University No.1, Navanagar, Huballi – 580 025. Rep. by its Registrar 2. Vaikunta Baliga College of Law Kunjibettu, Udupi-2 Rep. by its Principal 3. SBBR Mahajana Law College Jayalakshmipuram, Mysuru-570012, Rep. by its Principal. … Respondents (By Sri. Ganapathi Bhat Vajrath, Advocate for R1) These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to call for the records concerning and connected with the impugned circular bearing dated 4-5/4/2017 at Annex-A issued by R-1 peruse the same and declare the said circular as illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable in law and etc.
These Writ Petitions coming on for Orders this day, the Court made the following:-
ORDER These two students of Law Course are before this Court laying a challenge to the Circular dated 4-5/April 2017 issued by the respondent No.1-University at Annexure – A to the effect that a student joining a course of a particular academic period has to in any event, accomplish the course within double the duration thereof with no leniency whatsoever.
2. Learned Panel Counsel Sri.Ganapathi Bhat Vajrath for the respondent No.1–University places on record a copy of judgment dated 30.10.2017 made by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.21371/2017 c/w W.P.No.20444/2017 (EDN-EX), wherein the identical matters have been treated and the relief has been denied to the petitioners therein. Therefore, there is no reason to take a different view in these matters also.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners brings to the notice of this Court that the petitioner No.2 – Sri.Sadananda having been declared to have passed in the law examination in the revaluation, he has already been enrolled as an advocate and therefore his writ petition has become infructuous.
In view of the above, the W.P.No.47540/2017 is dismissed; W.P.No.47541/2017 is disposed off as having become infructuous.
Sd/- JUDGE KPS