KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY vs RAKESH SHETTY

- 1 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


TH
RESERVED ON 04 AUGUST 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

TH
DATED THIS THE 30 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2026

PRESENT

THE HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU, CHIEF JUSTICE

AND

THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

WRIT APPEAL NO.1060 OF 2025 (EDN-RES)

BETWEEN:

KARNATAKA STATE LAW UNIVERSITY
NAVANAGAR, HUBBALLI,
KARNATAKA-580025
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
…APPELLANT

(BY SMT. JAYNA KOTHARI, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GIRISHKUMAR R., ADVOCATE)



















AND:

1. RAKESH SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
S/O KARUNAKAR SHETTY,
R/AT HEENKILA HOSAMANE HIRGANA
KARKALA TALUK,
UDUPI DISTRICT-576117.


Digitally signed by
MAHALAKSHMI B M
Location: High Court
of Karnataka


2. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINICPAL SECRETARY,
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
M.S. BUILDING, AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560001.

3. SOUNDARYA COLLEGE OF LAW
SOUNDARYANAGARA SIDEDAHALLI,
NAGASANDRA POST,
BENGALURU-560073.

- 2 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


4. KARNATAKA STATE BAR COUNCIL (KSBC),
ADJACENT TO HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
OLD ELECTION COMMISSION BUILDING,
DR. AMBEDKAR VEEDI, BENGALURU,
KARNATAKA-560001.

(RESPONDENT NO.4 IMPLEADED AS PER
COURT ORDER DATED 30.06.2026)
…RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SMT. NAMITHA MAHESH B.G., AGA FOR R-2;
SRI. T.P. VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE FOR R-4;
NOTICE TO R-3 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)


THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
ORDER DATED 09.12.2024 PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE
JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU IN
W.P.NO.31737/2024 AND ETC.,

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS PRONOUNCED AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. VIBHU BAKHRU ,CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA

C.A.V. JUDGMENT

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S. HEMALEKHA
(PER: )

1. The Karnataka State Law University [ University ] has
preferred this intra- court appeal, calling in question the order dated
09.12.2024 [ impugned order ] passed by the learned Single Judge

- 3 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


of this Court in W.P. No.31737/2024 (EDN-RES), whereby the
learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by respondent
No.1, set aside the endorsement dated 18.10.2024 issued by the
University and directed issuance of an eligibility certificate to
respondent No.1 for admission to the three year LL.B course.

2. The principal question arising for consideration in this appeal
is:
"Whether, a candidate having obtained a recognized
"First Degree", after prosecuting a regular course of
study, satisfies the eligibility criteria prescribed under
Rule 5(a) of the Bar Council of India, Rules of Legal
Education, 2008 for admission to the three Year LL.B
course?"

3. Respondent No.1 completed his SSLC in the year 1997, and
thereafter, completed his Job-Oriented Pre-University Diploma in
Computer Techniques [ JOC ] in the year 1999. Subsequently, he
pursued the Bachelor of Commerce [ B.Com ] course and
completed his graduation from Mangalore University in the year
2004. The B.Com degree was conferred on him by Mangalore
University at its Convocation held on 24.01.2005. He was also
gainfully employed in a private company for several years.

4. In the year 2024, respondent No.1 desired to pursue the
three year LL.B course and submitted an online application dated

- 4 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


24.06.2024 through respondent No.3, Soundarya College of Law.
The college accepted his application and respondent No.1 paid the
prescribed fee for the academic year 2024-2025.

5. The application was thereafter forwarded to the University for
issuance of an eligibility certificate. By endorsement dated
18.10.2024, the University declined to issue the eligibility
certificate, proceeding on the basis that in terms of Government
Order dated 06.08.2021, respondent No.1's JOC qualification could
not be treated as equivalent to Pre-University Course [ PUC ].
Aggrieved by the said endorsement, respondent No.1 approached
this Court by filing W.P.No.31737/2024 (EDN-RES).

Impugned order
6. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition, quashed
the endorsement dated 18.10.2024 issued by the University and
directed to issue the eligibility certificate.

7. The learned Single Judge held that Rule 5(a) of the Rules of
Legal Education, 2008 [ the Rules ] framed by the Bar Council of
India [ BCI ] in Part IV of the Bar Council of India Rules [ BCI Rules ]
governs admission to the three year LL.B. course. Further, it was
noticed that Rule 5(a) of the Rules provides that an applicant who

- 5 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


has graduated in any discipline of knowledge from a recognized
university, may apply for a three years' degree program in law.

8. The proviso to Rule 5 also refers to the "+2 Higher
Secondary Pass Certificate or First Degree Certificate" in the
context of candidates who have pursued their studies through
distance or correspondence method. The requirement of a +2
Higher Secondary Pass Certificate applies to the five year
integrated course and First Degree Certificate applies to the
candidates seeking admission to the three year LL.B course. The
learned Single Judge further held that the Explanation to Rule 5
relates only to graduation/post graduation obtained through the
Open University system and would not be applicable in determining
the eligibility of a candidate for the three year LL.B course.

9. The learned Single Judge further held that respondent No.1
had admittedly obtained a recognised B.Com degree from
Mangalore University and therefore, possessed the requisite First
Degree qualification. Consequently, the question as to whether his
earlier JOC qualification was equivalent to PUC did not arise for
determining his eligibility for admission to the three year LL.B
course. The University was accordingly directed to issue the
eligibility certificate.

- 6 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025



10. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the University has
preferred the present appeal.

11. Ms. Jayna Kothari, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
University, submits that the educational progression contemplated
for admission to the three year LL.B. course is 10+2 followed by
three years of graduation. The graduation degree cannot,
therefore, be viewed in isolation so as to dispense with the
foundational 10+2 qualification. She submits that Rule 5 of the
Rules has been misinterpreted by the learned Single Judge.

12. Secondly, it is contended that the clarification issued by the
BCI in 2017, provides that the basic qualification for the five year
th
integrated law course is 10 standard followed by +2, whereas, for
the three year LL.B course, the basic qualification is 10 +2 followed
by a three year graduation.

13. Reliance is placed upon the decision of the Co-Ordinate
Bench of this Court in Krishnamurthy D.H. and Another Vs.
1
State of Karnataka and others , contending that the said decision
recognises the necessity of fulfilling the prescribed conditions
before JOC qualification can be treated as equivalent to PUC. It is,

1
W.P. No.24206/2021 (S-KAT) D.D.28.03.2022

- 7 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


therefore, contended that in the absence of a valid 10+2/PUC
qualification, the subsequent acquisition of a B.Com degree cannot
cure the defect; and on that basis the endorsement dated
18.10.2024 issued by the University is sought to be sustained.

14. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, on the
other hand, submits that the University's entire case proceeds on
an incorrect premise. It is submitted that respondent No.1 had
already obtained a recognized B.Com degree in 2005, and it is this
"First Degree" that constitutes the basis of his eligibility under Rule
5(a) of the Rules.

15. Krishnamurthy's ( supra ) decision is sought to be
distinguished on the ground that the case concerned candidates
seeking appointment as Civil Police Constables, where the
th
recruitment notification itself prescribed PUC/12 standard or an
equivalent qualification as the minimum educational qualification.
The candidates therein were relying upon their JOC qualification to
satisfy that requirement. Whereas, in the instant case the
admission sought is to the three year LL.B. course, for which the
relevant qualification under Rule 5(a) of the Rules is a "First
Degree".

- 8 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


Reasons and conclusions
16. The Advocates Act, 1961 [ Advocates Act ] was enacted to
amend and consolidate the law relating to legal practitioners and to
provide for the constitution of Bar Councils and an All India Bar.
Section 4 of the Advocates Act provides for the constitution of the
BCI. The functions of the BCI are set out in sub-section (1) of
Section 7 of the Advocates Act, which reads as follows:
" 7. Functions of Bar Council of India.- (1) The
functions of the Bar Council of India shall be

(a) [x x x]

(b) to lay down standards of professional conduct and
etiquette for advocates;

(c) to lay down the procedure to be followed by its
disciplinary committee and the disciplinary
committee of each State Bar Council;

(d) to safeguard the rights, privileges and interests of
advocates;

(e) to promote and support law reform;

(f) to deal with and dispose of any matter arising
under this Act, which may be referred to it by a
State Bar Council;

(g) to exercise general supervision and control over
State Bar Councils;

(h) to promote legal education and to lay down
standards of such education in consultation with
the Universities in India imparting such education
and the State Bar Councils;

(i) to recognise Universities whose degree in law
shall be a qualification for enrolment as an

- 9 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


advocate and for that purpose to visit and inspect
Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to
visit and inspect Universities in accordance with
such directions as it may give in this behalf;

(ia) to conduct seminars and organise talks on legal
topics by eminent jurists and publish journals and
papers of legal interest;

(ib) to organise legal aid to the poor in the prescribed
manner;

(ic) to recognise on a reciprocal basis foreign
qualifications in law obtained outside India for the
purpose of admission as an advocate under this
Act;

(j) to manage and invest the funds of the Bar Council;

(k) to provide for the election of its members;

(l) to perform all other functions conferred on it by or
under this Act;

(m) to do all other things necessary for discharging the
aforesaid functions;"

17. In exercise of the powers conferred upon it under the
Advocates Act, the Bar Council of India has framed the Rules in
consultation with the Universities and the State Bar Councils.

18. In the present case, respondent No.1 has successfully
completed his degree in Commerce and has been awarded a
B.Com degree. The relevant clauses of Rule 2 of the Rules,
setting out the definition of certain terms relevant to the context of
the present appeal, are set out below :

- 10 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


" 2. Definitions:

(vi) "Bachelor degree in law" means and includes a
degree in law conferred by the University recognized by
the Bar Council of India for the purpose of the Act and
includes a bachelor degree in law after any bachelor
degree in science, arts, commerce, engineering,
medicine, or any other discipline of a University for a
period of study not less than three years or an integrated
bachelor degree combining the course of a first bachelor
degree in any subject and also the law running together
in concert and compression for not less than a period of
five years after 10+2 or 11+1 courses as the case may
be.

(viii) "First Degree" means Bachelor Degree in any
branch of knowledge such as Arts, Fine Arts; Science,
Commerce, Management, Medicine, Engineering,
Pharmacy, Technology etc. conferred by Universities or
any other qualifications awarded by an
institution/authority recognized by the Bar Council of
India, from time to time.

(xiii) "Integrated Degree course in law" means
double degree course comprising the bachelor degree in
any branch of knowledge prosecuted simultaneously with
the Degree course in law in such an integrated manner
as may be designed by the University concerned for a
continuous period of not less than five years.

(xxii) "Recognized University" means a University
whose degree in law is recognized by the Bar Council of
India under these Rules.

(xxvi) "Second degree" means a course of study
leading to degree, which can be prosecuted only after
obtaining a bachelor degree."

19. There is no dispute that the B.Com degree awarded to
respondent No.1 falls within the meaning of the expression 'First
Degree' as defined under clause (viii) of Rule 2 of the Rules.

- 11 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


20. Rule 5 of the Rules sets out the eligibility conditions for
admission to a Three Year Law Degree Course and Integrated
Degree Program. The interpretation of the said Rule is central to
the controversy involved in the present appeal. The said Rule is
reproduced below:
" 5. Eligibility for admission:

(a) Three Year Law Degree Course: An applicant
who has graduated in any discipline of knowledge from a
University established by an Act of Parliament or by a State
legislature or an equivalent national institution recognized
as a Deemed to be University or foreign University
recognized as equivalent to the status of an Indian
University by an authority competent to declare
equivalence, may apply for a three years' degree program in
law leading to conferment of LL.B. degree on successful
completion of the regular program conducted by a
University whose degree in law is recognized by the Bar
Council of India for the purpose of enrolment.

(b) Integrated Degree Program: An applicant
who has successfully completed Senior Secondary School
course (‘+2’) or equivalent (such as 11+1, ‘A’ level in Senior
School Leaving certificate course) from a recognized
University of India or outside or from a Senior Secondary
Board or equivalent, constituted or recognized by the Union
or by a State Government or from any equivalent institution
from a foreign country recognized by the government of that
country for the purpose of issue of qualifying certificate on
successful completion of the course, may apply for and be
admitted into the program of the Centres of Legal Education
to obtain the integrated degree in law with a degree in any
other subject as the first degree from the University whose
such a degree in law is recognized by the Bar Council of
India for the purpose of enrolment.

Provided that applicants who have obtained +2
Higher Secondary Pass Certificate or First Degree
Certificate after prosecuting studies in distance or
correspondence method shall also be considered as eligible

- 12 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


for admission in the Integrated Five Years course or three
years’ LL.B. course, as the case may be.

Explanation : The applicants who have obtained 10
+2 or graduation / post graduation through open Universities
system directly without having any basic qualification for
prosecuting such studies are not eligible for admission in
the law courses."

21. There is no dispute that Mangalore University, which
awarded the B.Com degree to respondent No.1 is a University
established by an Act of the State Legislature within the meaning
of Rule 5(a) of the Rules.

22. The explanation to Rule 5 of the Rules expressly provides
that applicants who have obtained a qualification of (10+2) or
graduation / post-graduation through open universities system
directly, without having any basic qualification for prosecuting “such
studies", are not eligible for admission in the Law Courses. It thus
follows that the qualification on the basis of which admissions are
sought to either a three year Law degree course or an integrated
degree program should not have been obtained without the basic
qualification required for prosecuting "such studies".

23. In the present case, respondent No.1 contends that he
satisfies the eligibility criteria for admission to the three year law
degree course on the basis of his B.Com qualification, which, as

- 13 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


stated earlier, falls within the meaning of a "first degree" as defined
under clause (viii) of Rule 2 of the Rules.

24. There is no dispute that respondent No.1 was admitted to the
B.Com degree course at Bhuvanendra College, Karkala, which is
affiliated with Mangalore University and successfully completed the
said course. According to the University, respondent No.1 is
ineligible for admission to the three year law degree course by
virtue of the explanation to Rule 5 of the Rules.

25. It is also relevant to refer to the proviso to Rule 5 of the
Rules, which expressly provides that applicants, who have
obtained a Higher Secondary (+2) pass certificate or a first degree
certificate after pursuing their studies through distance or
correspondence method shall also be eligible for admission to the
integrated five year law course or three year LL.B course, as the
case may be.

26. Thus, a student who has obtained Higher Secondary (+2)
pass certificate through correspondence method would also be
eligible for admission to the integrated five year law course.
However, the Explanation to Rule 5 would render such a student
ineligible if the (10+2) qualification had been obtained directly

- 14 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


through Open University system without possessing the basic
qualification required for obtaining the (+2) Higher Secondary pass
certificate.

27. Similarly, by virtue of the proviso to Rule 5 of the Rules, an
applicant who has secured a ‘first degree’ certificate after
prosecuting studies through the distance or correspondence
method would be eligible for admission to the three year LL.B
course, subject to having acquired the ‘basic qualification’ required
for prosecuting ‘such studies’.

28. A plain reading of Rule 5(a) of the Rules, read with the
proviso and the Explanation thereto, clearly indicates that the (+2)
qualification would not have independent relevance as a qualifying
criterion for admission to the three year LL.B course in the case of
a candidate who has secured a recognized first degree after
possessing the basic qualification required for pursuing the course
of study leading to that degree.

29. It is also material to note that respondent No.1 did not obtain
his ‘first degree’ certificate through any open university system, but
he obtained the degree by prosecuting a regular course of study

- 15 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


after securing admission to a college affiliated with Mangalore
University.

30. We may note that Rule 5 of the Rules fell for consideration
before the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in Vishnu Vs. Bar
2
Council of India and others . We consider it relevant to set out
the following paragraphs:
"21. An explanation is normally to be read in a manner
so as to harmonize with the main section and cannot be
construed as to widen or limit the scope and purview of the
section. The explanation will have to be construed in a
manner that it is read in harmony with the main section.
Proviso to Section 5 provides that, a person obtaining + 2
higher secondary pass certificate or first degree certificate
after prosecuting studies in distance or correspondence
method is also considered as eligible for admission to the
law course. Explanation cannot be read as limiting the
operation of the provision itself. The criteria for admission
to the three year law degree course is that, a candidate
should possess a graduate degree i.e. the first degree
(Bachelor degree in any branch of knowledge, such as
Arts, Fine Arts, Science, Commerce, Management and so
on). The only limitation would be that the first degree
certificate and/or the first degree shall be from institution
recognised by the Bar Council of India from time to time.

22. The person obtaining the first degree certificate from
the Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University,
Nashik is recognised by the Bar Council of India. We
specifically asked the learned counsel for the Bar Council
of India as to whether the first degree certificate obtained
from Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University,
Nashik is recognised by the Bar Council of India. Mr.
Deshmukh, learned counsel for the Bar Council of India
candidly accepted that the first degree certificate from
Yashwantrao Chavan Maharashtra Open University,
Nashik is recognised by the Bar Council of India for
admission to the law course. The explanation prescribes

2
W.P. No.6752/2021 D.D. 04.05.2022 : CNR No.HCBM030181802021

- 16 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


that the applicants obtaining 10 + 2 or graduation/
postgraduation through Open University system directly
without having any basic qualification for prosecuting such
studies are not eligible for admission in the law course.

23. The words “basic qualification” appearing in the
explanation to Rule 5 is the subject matter of consideration.
“Basic qualification” is not defined under the Rules or the
Act. In an Open University, for an admission to the
Commerce graduation course, the criterion are provided. A
person having qualification of H.S.C. or equivalent
th
examination or is 11 Standard Passed, or a Government
recognised certificate/ diploma of two years after S.C.C.,
are eligible for admission, and a person who had
undergone a preparatory programme of Yashwantrao
Chavan Maharashtra Open University, Nashik with
minimum 40 marks is also eligible for admission to the first
year degree certificate course. Equivalence is provided to
the said courses.

24. Under Government Resolution dated 20/5/2011, the
Government of Maharashtra has granted equivalence of
th th
10 and 12 to those who have passed preparatory
programme and first year of graduation. The preparatory
programme would be the basic course for securing
admission to the first degree course in an open University.
The basic course for first degree certificate would be
different for different institutions. The Bar Council has not
restricted the admission to the law degree course to the
students passing from a regular University only. Even a
student graduating in any discipline of knowledge from a
equivalent national institution recognised as a deemed to
be University or even a foreign University recognised as
equivalent to the status of an Indian University by an
authority competent to declare equivalence can apply for
three year degree programme in law. It is not necessary
that a foreign University recognised as equivalent to the
status of an Indian University may require 10 + 2 as a
basic qualification for the first degree course. A person who
has completed 10 + 2 or equivalent is also considered
eligible for admission to the five year integrated law degree
course as per Rule 5(b).

25. The aspect of basic qualification appearing in
explanation would differ from University to University and
course to course. The basic qualification for first degree

- 17 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


course in an Open University would be the preparatory
th
course and/or 12 Standard passed. The basic
qualification as is appearing in explanation will have to be
given a wider interpretation and cannot be given a
restricted interpretation. If restricted interpretation is given
to the words “basic qualification” appearing in explanation,
then the same would not be in tune and consonance with
the main rule. A person who has completed the
preparatory programme course from Yashwantrao Chavan
Maharashtra Open University, Nashik and who has also
completed 10 + 2 from any Board, is eligible for admission
to the first degree course in branch of Arts, Commerce,
Science. If the restrictive meaning is given to the basic
qualification, then a student who has passed graduation
from the open University and had earlier completed 10 + 2
from S.S.C. Board would be eligible for admission to the
three year law course, but a person who has been
admitted to the first degree course in the open University
after passing the preparatory programme for the said
course, would not be eligible. The same cannot be the
intention of the legislature."

31. The Full Bench held that the Explanation to Rule 5 of the
Rules cannot be read so as to limit the operation of the main
provision. We respectfully concur with the said view.

32. It would not be apposite to read the Explanation in a manner
that curtails the plain language of Rule 5(a) of the Rules.

33. Under the said provision, a candidate possessing a
Bachelor's Degree in any discipline of knowledge, such as Arts,
Fine Arts, Science, Commerce or Management, from a recognized
university would be eligible to apply for admission to the three year

- 18 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


law degree course, subject to satisfying the other eligibility
requirements prescribed under the Rules.

34. There is no dispute that the B.Com degree awarded to
respondent No.1 by Mangalore University is recognized as a ‘first
degree’. The expression ‘basic qualification’ occurring in the
Explanation to Rule 5 must, therefore, be understood in the context
of basic qualification required for pursuing the course of study
leading to the first degree. In other words, what is material is
whether the candidate possessed the basic qualification prescribed
for prosecuting the studies necessary to secure the first degree.

35. We also consider it relevant to refer to the Full Bench
decision of the Madras High Court in M. Ramachandran Vs.
3
Chairman, Law Admissions 2015-2016 :
"40. The language and tenor of Rule 5(a) and 5(b) read
with the first proviso and the Explanation make it amply
clear that prosecution of a regular course is mandatory
only for the immediately previous qualifying certificate
and/or degree, for example, graduate degree for the Three
Years LLB Course and Senior Secondary Certificate for the
Integrated Degree Program. Had the Rules intended
otherwise, the Rules would have specifically provided that
candidates would not be eligible for admission to the Three
Years LLB unless they had obtained the Secondary and
Senior Secondary Certificates upon prosecution of studies
through a regular course or through distance or
correspondence mode. The Bar Council of India has, in its

3
2018 SCC OnLine Mad 13663

- 19 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


wisdom, chosen to frame rules whereunder prosecution of
a regular course is mandatory only in respect of the Senor
Secondary Certificate for admission to the Integrated
Degree Course and in respect of graduation for admission
to the Three Years LLB course. We are also of the view
that once a recognized university or a recognized board
issues a certificate, it is not for any other authority to
question the certificate on the ground of ineligibility to
obtain the certificate, until and unless the certificate is
cancelled by an appropriate authority and/or by a Court of
law. To hold otherwise would be to open the pandora's
box, for years later certificates might be questioned on
grounds such as inadequate attendance, failure to clear
internal test examinations and the like and it would be
impossible for candidates possessing the degree and/or
certificate to adduce cogent materials and/or evidence to
satisfy those questioning the certificates. When a regular
certificate is granted by a recognized board, there is a
presumption that the candidate was eligible to be conferred
the certificate."

36. The aforesaid passage also has a bearing on the controversy
involved in the present appeal. The Full Bench held that the
requirement of prosecuting a regular course relates to the
immediately preceding qualifying certificate or degree.

37. In the context of admission to the three year LL.B course, the
immediately preceding qualifying degree is the ‘first degree’
obtained from a recognised university. The Full Bench further
observed that once a recognised university or board has issued a
certificate or degree, another authority cannot question the validity
of such certificate or degree on the ground that the candidate was

- 20 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


ineligible to obtain such qualification, unless it has been cancelled
by the competent authority or declared invalid by a Court of law.

38. In the present case, respondent No.1 pursued a regular
course of study to secure the B.Com degree from Mangalore
University. It is not the appellant's case that respondent No.1 was
ineligible for admission to the said course on the basis of the
qualification possessed by him. Nor is it the appellant's case that
the B.Com degree awarded by Mangalore University has been
cancelled or otherwise declared invalid.

39. Thus, respondent No.1, having successfully completed a
regular course of study and obtained a recognized first degree in
commerce from Mangalore University, satisfies the eligibility criteria
prescribed under Rule 5(a) of the Rules for admission to the three
year LL.B course. The University was, therefore, not justified in
declining to issue the eligibility certificate.

40. Insofar as the reliance placed by the learned counsel for the
appellant on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in
Krishnamurthy ( supra ) is concerned, the said decision is
distinguishable on facts. The controversy therein arose in the
context of recruitment to the post of Civil Police Constable, for

- 21 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


which the prescribed educational qualification was PUC or its
equivalent. The question that arose for consideration was whether
the JOC qualification possessed by the candidates could be treated
as equivalent to PUC for the purpose of satisfying the prescribed
eligibility criteria.

41. In the present case, however, respondent No.1 seeks
admission to the three year LL.B course on the strength of a
recognized first degree obtained from Mangalore University. The
eligibility criteria prescribed under Rule 5 of the Rules are,
therefore, materially different. Consequently, the decision in
Krishnamurthy has no application to the facts of the present case.

42. For the foregoing reasons, we are of the considered view
that respondent No.1, having obtained a recognized ‘first degree’ in
commerce from Mangalore University, after prosecuting a regular
course of study, satisfies the eligibility criteria prescribed under
Rule 5 (a) of the Rules for admission to the three year LL.B.
Course.

43. We find no infirmity in the conclusion of the learned Single
Judge warranting interference in this intra-Court appeal.

- 22 -
WA No. 1060 of 2025


Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. The order dated
09.12.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge is affirmed.

44. The pending interlocutory applications also stand disposed
of.


Sd/-
(VIBHU BAKHRU)
CHIEF JUSTICE


Sd/-
(K.S. HEMALEKHA)
JUDGE

MBM