The Telangana high court in its order dated 29 March 2023 in the matter of Mohammed Absar Ahmed v/s state of Telangana dismissed a petition filed by a law student to allow him to appear in the exam challenging the action of the respondent college of not allowing him to appear in his semester examination due to low attendance.
The court while dismissing the petition held that since nobody has the power to condone attendance below 65% this court does not have it either. Something which is prohibited by regulations is not a subject matter of mandamus.
The court was hearing a petition filed by a law student who was debarred from appearing in his semester examination owing to his attendance below the mandatory requirement of 75%. The petitioner contended that the respondents are not maintaining attendance records properly and he has 80% of attendance. The respondents on the other denied the allegations levelled by the petitioner by stating as per the regulations the petitioner is required to have 75% of attendance which he does not have and thus a show cause notice was issued to him to which he provided his reply and after considering the response the name of the petitioner was struck down off the rolls and therefore there is no error or irregularity committed by the respondent.
The court referred to the decision in the case of Ashok Kumar Thakur v/s state of Himachal Pradesh where it was held that considering the career of the young student, we tried to approach the matter with all possible sympathy however we cannot compel the authority to do something which is beyond its legal competence.
The court observed that the petitioner has 58.66% against the mandatory requirement of 75% though the respondent can reduce mandatory attendance to a maximum of 10% on certain conditions still the petitioner would not fall under that category as he still would lack 6.34 % of attendance.
The court referred to the decisions in the state of Andhra Pradesh in M. Sunil Chakravarthy v/s principal Sreekalahasteeswara Institute of Technology and various other judgments and observed that since nobody has the authority to condone attendance below 65% this court does not have it either and something prohibited by regulations cannot be a subject matter of mandamus.
And thus, considering the above observations dismissed the petition of the petitioner.
Written by Amruta Pawar, semester 6th, college: The University of Mumbai thane sub campus
