Summary: The Madras High Court, led by Judge D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, looked into a case involving three law students who couldn't meet attendance requirements because of personal challenges. The court weighed the importance of keeping up academic standards against the need to consider real difficulties students face.
Shakthi Shyam R, a fourth-year student in the B.C.A., L.L.B. (Hons) program at Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, had trouble with attendance due to a stomach ulcer and the need to work part-time because of financial issues. With only 41% attendance, he was initially not allowed to take exams.
"His father works as a mechanic, and his mother is a stay-at-home mom. He will be the first in his family to graduate college."
B. Vadhanan, another student from the same university, missed classes because of a serious back problem, which brought his attendance down to 44%. Even though he had medical proof, he was told to repeat the semester.
"He couldn't attend classes in the seventh semester from August to October 2025 due to a serious back problem."
A. Miruthula Shre, a fourth-year student at the Government Law College in Coimbatore, saw her attendance drop to 36.9% after being diagnosed with diabetes. Her initial request to take exams was denied.
"She suddenly fainted and was admitted to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore, where her blood sugar level was recorded at 490 mg/dl."
Judge D. Bharatha Chakravarthy looked at these cases in light of a Delhi High Court decision that questioned strict attendance rules. The court recognized the need for academic standards but also saw the importance of being flexible given modern teaching methods.
"The need for attendance should not significantly harm the student's future."
The court allowed the students to continue their studies and suggested that the Bar Council of India rethink its attendance rules. It also encouraged Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University to consider other options besides making students repeat a whole year.
"The Bar Council of India should re-examine the required attendance rules."
The court's decision shows a move towards more understanding academic policies, balancing the demands of legal education with the real-life challenges students face. It emphasizes the changing nature of educational standards and the need for schools to adapt to the times.
