The City Civil Court in Ahmedabad, presided over by Judge Bhavesh K. Avashia, issued a landmark judgment on November 16, 2024, in favor of Shashi Kumar Mohata, a law aspirant who was denied admission to Daulatbhai Trivedi Law College in 2000. The court directed Gujarat University and its affiliated college to enroll Mohata in the 3-year LLB course for the academic year 2025-26, holding that the denial of admission based on technical eligibility criteria was unwarranted and unjustified.

Mohata, a commerce graduate from the University of Calcutta, had applied for admission to the 3-year LLB course in 2000 but was denied due to his total years of formal education falling short of the required 15 years (12 years of schooling and 3 years of graduation). Having completed 11 years of schooling followed by a 3-year undergraduate course, his total academic years amounted to 14. The university claimed that this shortfall rendered him ineligible for the course. Mohata, however, argued that his Bachelor of Commerce degree was sufficient to meet the academic qualifications required for admission, irrespective of the number of years spent in formal education.

Following the denial, Mohata filed a civil suit (CS/1152/2001) against Gujarat University and Daulatbhai Trivedi Law College, seeking a declaration of his eligibility and a mandatory injunction for admission. The suit saw delays, including a dismissal in 2017 for procedural non-compliance, and was restored in 2022 upon Mohata’s plea. The court ultimately ruled in his favor after a thorough examination of documentary evidence.

The court framed key issues, including whether Mohata’s academic qualifications were sufficient for admission, whether his payment of fees was acknowledged, and whether he was entitled to admission to the LLB course. Judge Avashia addressed these points in detail:

1. Eligibility Based on Bachelor’s Degree: The court stated that the primary criterion for admission to the 3-year LLB course is the possession of a valid Bachelor’s degree from a recognized university, regardless of the cumulative years of formal education. Referring to Mohata’s Bachelor of Commerce degree from the University of Calcutta, the court noted, “The defendants have no right to deny admission merely on the ground that the plaintiff had studied only for 14 years instead of 15 years. The key criterion remains the possession of a Bachelor's degree.”
2. Technicality of 15-Year Rule: The court criticized the rigid application of the 15-year educational rule, noting that it created unwarranted discrimination between students from different academic systems. It observed, “The Constitution of India does not permit such arbitrary discrimination, especially when it obstructs access to education and violates the principles of equality and fairness.”
3. Payment of Fees and Procedural Non-Compliance: While Mohata alleged that he had paid the admission fees, the court found discrepancies in the documentary evidence regarding the payment. Despite this, it ruled that the issue of fees was secondary to the substantive question of eligibility.
4. Defendants’ Lack of Counter Evidence: The defendants failed to produce any substantial rebuttal evidence or cross-examine Mohata’s claims effectively. This absence of evidence reinforced the court’s conclusion in favor of the plaintiff.

Directions Issued by the Court

In its final order, the court directed the following:

1. Admission to LLB Course: Gujarat University and Daulatbhai Trivedi Law College were instructed to admit Mohata to the 3-year LLB course from the academic year 2025-26, subject to compliance with certain conditions.
2. Verification of Documents: Mohata was required to produce his original marksheets and degree certificate within one month from the date of the order for verification. The defendants were permitted to cross-verify the documents and take appropriate action if discrepancies were found.
3. Non-Discrimination Based on 15-Year Rule: The court specifically prohibited the defendants from denying admission solely on the ground that Mohata had not completed 15 years of formal education.
4.  Litigation Costs: The defendants were directed to bear the costs incurred by Mohata in pursuing the case.

Advocate R.P. Ruparel represented Mohata, while Advocates R.A. Patel and J.R. Patel appeared for Gujarat University and Daulatbhai Trivedi Law College, respectively. 

Case Title: Shashi Kumar Mohata v. Gujarat University and Another

Case No.: Civil Suit No. 1152 of 2001

Bench: Judge Bhavesh K. Avashia