Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Begin Stakeholder Discussions On Requirement Of Mandatory Attendance Norms In UG & PG Courses

The Delhi High Court in a slew of directions has asked the Secretary, Union Ministry of Education (dealing with Higher Education) to commence within two weeks stakeholder consultations to discuss whether attendance norms should be made mandatory in undergraduate and postgraduate courses.A division bench of Justice Prathiba Singh and Justice Amit Sharma in its September 9 order further directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the Secretary, Ministry of Education (Department of Higher Education) to issue a circular across the country, "as a last opportunity", to all educational institutions–both at undergraduate and postgraduate level, to "constitute their Grievance Redressal Committees within two weeks, failing which action would be taken as per law". The bench was dealing with a suo motu case concerning the suicide of Sushant Rohilla, a student of Amity Law School, Delhi in 2016. His friend wrote a letter to then CJI alleging in August that year that Rohilla was subjected to harassment by the college and some faculty members for maintaining low attendance. As per the letter, Rohilla was forced to repeat an entire academic year. The Supreme Court had then taken cognizance of the letter petition by the friend, and had finally in its order of March 6, 2017 transferred the matter to the high court which has been hearing the matter. Meanwhile, the court in its order further said that while deliberating upon the aspect of mandatory attendance norms, stakeholders shall keep certain factors in mind during the discussions.The court said this after noting the submissions made by various parties including the Union of India, regulatory authorities and educational institutions which are parties in the matter. "The ld. ASG has clearly taken the position that the Central Government is willing to undertake consultations with regard to the attendance norms. Such consultation in the opinion of the Court would be necessary to enable gathering of views of all stakeholders including institutions of higher education, teachers, students, parent bodies etc. Various factors need to be considered in order to decide as to whether attendance norms ought to be mandatory or not," the bench underscored. Notably among these factors, the stakeholders have been asked to consider the safeguards that institutions need to put in place to accommodate students, who do not fulfil these norms, and whether enforcement of the norms through penalties like "debarment from exams, halting promotion to the next class/ academic year" should be permitted.Another factor that the court has listed in its order, is the "impact" of mandatory attendance norms on the "physical and mental health" of the students and the role of Grievance Redressal Committees. Other factors are–whether mandatory attendance norms are being "actually followed" in institutions of higher education or have been rendered redundant in most courses, especially in non-clinical and non-practical courses; whether these norms are being genuinely followed by students as it was stated that attendance by proxy has become quite prevalent, at least in some institutions; would mandatory attendance requirements be necessary in courses which are based purely on theory or self-learning. The stakeholders are to also consider whether mandatory attendance norms would be required considering students have access to various "learning platforms", including internet platforms; whether these norms have been prescribed in other countries–in which countries, and for which courses; whether these norms can be relaxed and in which manner and for which courses. "Whether voluntary attending of classes ought to be encouraged, in order to enhance responsibility amongst the students rather than forcing the same through penalties etc; Whether a warning system ought to be put in place before penalising any students or parents for lacking in attendance; Whether teachers also ought to be answerable for lack of attendance by students," the order notes. The court thereafter directed the UGC to file its affidavit on aspects mentioned in the court's earlier order of August 21. The court further directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to submit the material relied by it while taking the stand that "attendance norms are mandatory internationally as well". The bench further said that on the aspect of international attendance norms, if any other institution/parties wish to place any material it can do so. The high court also asked the counsel for respondent no. 1– Amity Law School, Delhi to "seek instructions" on if the institution is willing to make "any ex-gratia compensation" to the family of the deceased student.Permitting the institutions who have been added as parties in the matter to file their responses on the mandatory attendance norm issue, the court listed the matter on October 14. BackgroundThe high court had in its August 21 order said that there is an imminent need to have reconsideration of mandatory...

Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Begin Stakeholder Discussions On Requirement Of Mandatory Attendance Norms In UG & PG Courses

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Begin Stakeholder Discussions On Requirement Of Mandatory Attendance Norms In UG & PG Courses

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers