In a compassionate and pragmatic decision, the Allahabad High Court, through Justice Saral Srivastava, directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to permit visually impaired petitioner Navendu Aggarwal to apply for and appear in the All India Bar Examination (AIBE-XIX). The court underscored that the delay in submitting the application form was caused by errors attributable to the petitioner’s university, and not by any fault of his own.
Case Background
The petitioner, Navendu Aggarwal, approached the court through a writ petition (Writ-C No. 35091 of 2024) seeking multiple reliefs concerning discrepancies in his 5th semester examination results. Represented by counsels Akash Patel and Varun Singh, Aggarwal highlighted procedural lapses by the university, including the failure to attach computer-generated printouts of his answers to his examination sheets, leading to erroneous results.
The petitioner contended that these errors caused substantial delays, depriving him of the opportunity to timely apply for the All India Bar Examination, a prerequisite for practicing law in India.
Legal Issues
1. Rectification of Examination Results:
The primary issue revolved around the university’s procedural mistake in evaluating the petitioner’s examination answers. The university later acknowledged and rectified the error, issuing a corrected mark sheet.
2. Opportunity to Appear for AIBE-XIX:
A more pressing concern was whether the petitioner, despite the delay caused by the university, could still be allowed to appear for the AIBE-XIX. This examination is a vital step for law graduates to practice as advocates in India.
Court’s Observations and Ruling
The court noted that the petitioner, being visually impaired, faced undue hardships because of the university’s fault. Addressing this, Justice Saral Srivastava observed:
“Considering the fact that petitioner is visually impaired and there was no fault of the petitioner and because of the fault of the University, the petitioner was failed, which error has been corrected… the reason for not submitting the form in time for appearing in All India Bar Council Examination-2019 was beyond the control of the petitioner.”
While dismissing the writ petition as infructuous due to the rectification of results, the court exercised its discretionary powers to issue specific directions to BCI. It ordered:
1. Respondent No. 6 (BCI) to allow the petitioner to submit his application form for AIBE-XIX within one week.
2. Ensure that the petitioner is permitted to appear in the examination.
The court further directed BCI to consider any representation from the petitioner “sympathetically.”
Counsel and Representation
– Petitioner’s Counsel: Akash Patel and Varun Singh.
– Respondents’ Counsel: Prem Shanker Prasad (ASGI), Avanish Tripathi, and Sai Girdhar for the university and BCI.
