Isabella Mariam

The High Court of Kerala Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh allowed a writ petition challenging the rejection of admission to an Integrated BA LLB (Hons) course. The Court set aside the rejection letter issued by the law college and directed that the petitioner’s provisional admission be treated as regular. It held that the petitioner, having obtained the necessary basic qualifications through recognized channels including the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS), satisfied the eligibility requirements under Rule 5(b) of the Bar Council of India Rules. The Court directed that the admission granted pursuant to the earlier interim order shall now be considered final without any further objections.

The petitioner, an 18-year-old student, approached the Court seeking a direction to the Principal of Sree Narayana Law College, Poothotta, to admit him into the Integrated BA LLB (Hons) Course. The dispute arose after the Principal issued a rejection letter (Ext.P10) refusing admission on the ground that the petitioner had completed his Secondary and Senior Secondary education through the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS).

Also Read: Supreme Court: ‘Leave Encashment Not Available Twice’ — Sets Aside High Court Orders Allowing Second Encashment Post Re-employment

The petitioner contended that he had commenced his education at Bhavans Adarsha Vidyalaya under the CBSE stream, studying regularly up to the 8th Standard. Due to personal hardships, he transferred to Bhavans Vidyamandir, Elamakkara, continuing his 9th and 10th Standard education as a regular student. Subsequently, he appeared for the Senior Secondary Examination through NIOS, obtaining the necessary qualifications for admission to higher studies.

It was argued that Rule 5(b) of the Bar Council of India Rules on Legal Education prescribes that candidates who have completed Senior Secondary (Plus Two) courses from a recognized Board or equivalent institution are eligible for admission to an Integrated Law Degree program. The petitioner claimed he met these criteria and pointed out that the entrance examination prospectus did not specify any disqualification for NIOS students.

The petitioner qualified in the entrance examination with good marks and was allotted a seat at Sree Narayana Law College in the State merit list as per Ext.P8. At the time of seat allotment and initial verification, no objection regarding the petitioner’s qualifications was raised. However, upon final document verification on 18 October 2024, the College Principal rejected his admission, citing non-eligibility due to both basic and qualifying examinations being completed under the NIOS Scheme.

In response, the 6th respondent, NIOS, submitted that it is a national-level board equivalent to the CBSE and State Boards. NIOS clarified that its certifications are recognized across India, including by the Government of Kerala and the Association of Indian Universities (Ext.R6(b)). It was also submitted that NIOS study centres are largely existing recognized schools maintaining academic standards.

Notably, other respondents, including the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Kerala, did not file counter affidavits in the writ proceedings. The petitioner produced certificates from Bhavans Vidyamandir to establish that he was a bona fide regular student during his 9th and 10th standards.

The petitioner further contended that Rule 5(b) permits eligibility even where studies were completed through distance or correspondence methods, provided that the institutions are recognized. The petitioner urged that having pursued his schooling regularly and subsequently completing Plus Two through a recognized board, he could not be denied admission under the BCI Rules.

An interim order was passed earlier, staying the rejection and allowing the petitioner provisional admission. The petitioner now sought confirmation of that admission through final orders.

The Court observed that "a reading of Rule 5(b) would indicate that for admission to Integrated Degree Program, an applicant has to successfully complete Senior Secondary School Course (Plus Two) or equivalent from a recognised University of India or outside or from a Senior Secondary Board or equivalent constituted or recognised by the Union or by a State Government."

It recorded that "the proviso to Rule 5(b) states that applicants who have obtained Plus Two Higher Secondary pass certificate or first degree certificate after prosecuting studies in distance or correspondence method shall also be considered as eligible for admission."

Justice Nagaresh stated that "the petitioner has undergone his 8th Standard studies in Bhavans Adarsha Vidyalaya affiliated to CBSE", and further recorded that "the petitioner continued his studies in Bhavans Vidyamandir, Elamakkara in Standards IX and X attending regular classes."

The Court noted that "the petitioner passed 9th and 10th Standard Examinations under the NIOS Scheme," and recorded that "it must be treated that he is having basic qualification under an autonomous institution under the Ministry of Education."

It was recorded that "the National Institute of Open Schooling (NIOS) is an Autonomous Institution under the Department of School Education and Literacy, Ministry of Education, Government of India," and that "the Association of Indian Universities has granted equivalence to the courses of NIOS with those of other examinations of recognized Boards."

The Court further recorded that "the petitioner has been a regular school student during the period in which he obtained basic qualification and the Certificate issued by the NIOS is recognised by all Universities as per the directions of the Association of Indian Universities."

Justice Nagaresh observed that "therefore, the petitioner should be treated as eligible for admission to the Integrated BA LLB (Hons) Degree, in the light of Rule 5(b) of the BCI Rules."

The Court allowed the writ petition and directed that the petitioner’s admission to the Integrated BA LLB (Hons) Course in the 4th respondent-College be treated as regular.

Also Read: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail for Arrest Violations: 'Grounds Must Be Communicated in Writing' I 'Breach of Article 22(1) Makes Custody Illegal'

Ext.P10, the rejection letter issued by the Principal of the 3rd respondent-College, was set aside and quashed.

The Court further directed that no objection regarding the petitioner’s admission shall be raised on the ground of basic qualification or the method of passing the qualifying examination.

 It was recorded that the petitioner’s provisional admission pursuant to the interim order dated 21.10.2024 shall be considered final. Accordingly, the rejection was annulled, and the petitioner’s admission was regularized.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Petitioner: Sri V.V. Suresh, Advocate

For the Respondents: Sri C. Dinesh, Advocate; Smt. M.U. Vijayalakshmi, Advocate; Sri Rajit, Advocate; Sri V. Venulpal, Government Pleader

Case Title: V.S. Gourishankar v. Bar Council of India and Others

Neutral Citation: 2025: KER:31247

Case Number: W.P.(C) No. 36946 of 2024

Bench: Justice N. Nagaresh

[Read/Download order]