Court upholds Maharashtra National Law University's 75% attendance rule; criticizes applicant's conduct for misuse of review process.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court's Aurangabad Bench dismissed a review application filed by Ankita Jagannath Sonawale against Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU) regarding mandatory attendance requirements for examinations. The court underscored the sanctity of university regulations and the proper use of judicial review mechanisms.
The review application, filed by Sonawale, a post-graduate law student, challenged the university's decision to disallow her from participating in semester examinations due to failing to meet the 75% attendance requirement, as stipulated by MNLU's 2020 regulations. The university had slightly relaxed the attendance requirement to 67% under certain conditions, but Sonawale's attendance fell short even of this relaxed threshold.
Presided over by Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Ajit B. Kadethankar, the court found no merit in Sonawale's assertions of procedural impropriety and arbitrary treatment by the university. The judgment emphasized that a review is not an appeal and cannot be used to re-argue the case or introduce new evidence, particularly when the applicant has not produced substantial proof.
The court criticized the applicant for making reckless allegations against the university and others, including a fellow student, without substantial evidence. The judges noted that the applicant attempted to misuse the review mechanism to re-open settled matters, which they deemed an abuse of judicial process.
Highlighting the responsibilities of future legal professionals, the judgment expressed concern over the applicant’s conduct, urging adherence to professional discipline and honesty in legal practice. The court refrained from imposing costs on the applicant but recorded serious displeasure at the conduct exhibited in the review application.
Ultimately, the court upheld the university's adherence to its regulations and the decision of the grievance committee, dismissing the review application in its entirety.
Bottom line:-
Review application under Order XLVII, CPC, to challenge a High Court decision regarding mandatory attendance requirements for university examination - Court emphasized that review is not an appeal and cannot be used to reargue the case or introduce new evidence.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XLVII
