At GNLU Gandhinagar, two students stand to lose a year due to alleged administrative inaction following a retroactive rule change. The students have been detained in the third year of BALLB for the second consecutive year in August 2016, despite the existence of a university regulation enabling them to potentially be promoted this year.
The students had failed a paper each in the final exams of their third year, in 2015, and were eligible to appear for a repeat exam in July 2016.
According to the university rules at the time they failed their papers in 2015, detained students are allowed to take a 100 mark repeat exam for papers they fail after one year of detention.
However, in February 2016 GNLU amended this rule to provide that detained students would be allowed to take the repeat exam only after completing two years of detention, instead of one.
The two detained third year students applied in May 2016 to take the repeat exam for a shot to make it into fourth year - a year late after their detention - in August. The administration rejected their applications on 13 July without stating any reasons for rejection. On verbally interacting with the exam department the students were made aware that their applications were rejected due to the amended rules.
The students then wrote to the registrar that same week, arguing that amended rules could not have retroactive application and in their case the regulation as it stood at the time when they failed their papers, made them eligible to appear for the repeat exam in July 2016.
The academic session for 2016-2017 has already begun and the two students have still not heard from the GNLU administration, with the result that they are still sitting in the third year of the five-year BALLB program.
One of the two students told /Legally India/ that the registrar had most recently informed them that their application was sitting with the academic council.
We have reached out to GNLU director Bimal Patel for comment in the morning today, but have received no response yet.
The regulations that are behind the confusion in this case - the Gujarat National Law University (Academic, Mooting, Internship, Examinations, Hostel and Other Matters) Regulations 2015 – also courted controversy during the hearing of GNLU student Jaymin Brahmbatt’s writ against GNLU and Patel in the Gujarat high court.
During arguments in that case, GNLU cited certain amended provisions in the regulation which would have affected the petitioner adversely and GNLU and Patel favourably, were they applied retroactively. However, eventually, GNLU assured the high court that the amendment will not have retroactive application.
Comments
99% of GNLU community fully support Professor Patel.
He built a good auditorium but students are never allowed to use it. Treats students needs like as if we're beggars a he's the only one who can help us. One of the detained students is detained because a faculty didn't like the fact that he smoked so he kept failing him. That's how depraved Bimal and his slaves are, they take pleasure in destroying a students future and career because they haven't done anything life themselves. They're a shame to the profession of teaching. (apart from those few exceptions who are teaching because they want to teach, and not because they failed as lawyers)
GNLU does basically nothing as a college to build its name. All the prestige has come from alumni who have worked hard and impressed at firms. Bilal needs to resign if GNLU is to progress at all. Otherwise it will not only be an epitome of injustice, it will be the epitome of incompetence.
Mr. Patel's achievements aside (different matter), start understanding that there are more important things, such as resolving such things with logical thinking instead of being obtuse and taking on kids in court.
All said and done, back in the day, there was at least a voice despite the lack of a student union even if it was periodically and consistently disregarded. Viewing expression as dissent is a terrible way of going about things. It's tiring to consistently hear of this and one can only wonder if this is progressively getting worse, because the promise of things getting better isn't really happening if this is the kind of stuff we hear about. As someone on the outside now, I dread the fact that one would have to go to court to be heard.
It is heartening to see the alumni do well and the college gain a fair name in the market though. But academically the institution remains stunted to a large degree if you don't make the right moves and stop wasting resources on such things.