The Delhi High Court has observed that purpose of 3-year LL.M. course is to enable students to continue practice before Courts while simultaneously pursuing their Masters program. 

In doing so the court permitted a lawyer to appear in his second semester LLM exam at Delhi University after he was earlier prohibited for not completing the mandatory attendance requirement. 

The court was hearing a plea seeking a direction to prohibit Delhi University from conducting second semester examination of LL.M. three years course i.e. 2023-2026 without compliance of mandatory 90 hours classes of each subject. It also sought a quashing of the list of students who had been detained from sitting in the exams, thereby permitting the petitioners and others to sit for their exams among other prayers. 

The petitioner no. 1 argued that he is a student of LL.M. three-year course at the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi admitted in 2023. He was not permitted to appear in the second semester LL.M. exam due to shortage of attendance, as he had an attendance of 43.5% vis-a-vis the requirement which is 67.5%.

It was argued that the petitioner no.1, a lawyer, was engaged in attending Court proceedings and the timing of the classes, i.e. 12 noon is a peak time during the Court working hours. Due to this reason he was unable to meet the prescribed 67.5% attendance criteria. 

Justice Jasmeet Singh in his order said:

"In the present case, admittedly, the classes for LL.M. three year course, are conducted at 12 noon. The students, pursuing the said Course, are not required to suspend their Bar License during the course. I am of the view that the very purpose of the LL.M. three year course is to enable students to continue practice before the Courts while simultaneously pursuing their Masters program".

The petitioners' counsel on instructions submitted that the petitioner No.1–who was present in court, is willing to execute a bond, affidavit and given an undertaking to complete the shortfall in attendance during the succeeding semesters. He further undertook that any arrears of fee, if payable, shall also be duly paid. 

The court said that the same was fair and that the petitioner no. 1 shall be permitted to continue with his LLM course.

"The order is being passed in peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case," the court clarified. 

With respect to other petitioners the court noted that since nobody was representing other petitioners, the petition was dismissed qua them. 

The plea was disposed of in these terms. 

Case title: ADITYA SINGH & ORS. v/s UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.

W.P.(C) 9643/2024 & CM APPL. 23421/2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order