The Bombay High Court has directed the Director, Higher Education, Maharashtra, for the Common Entrance Test (CET) to admit a law aspirant to the three-year LLB course and said the denial of admission had no ‘logical justification’.
A division bench of Justice Ranjit More and Justice Bharati Dangre granted relief to one Aakash Vedak, a 22-year-old graduate who secured provisional admission to the LLB course but the admission was abruptly denied on the basis of his final-year graduation results.
Case Background
The petitioner student completed his graduation with an aggregate of 59.6 per cent marks. Thereafter, he secured 2069 rank in CET and was informed by the Commissioner, CET and CAP that he was given a provisional admission at Vidya Prasarak Mandal, Thane Municipal Council Law College.
However, when the petitioner went to the college to report as per the instructions received in the said communication, he was informed that he cannot be granted admission as his case was different and it was further informed that the matter will be referred to the Commissioner, CET and CAP.
The petitioner, therefore, approached the Commissioner and he was informed on September 18, 2018, that he was “not eligible for an admission to LLB (three years course) on the basis of his final year marks since he was an   old pattern candidate where the degree has been awarded and the class is given on the basis of final year marks”.
Thus, the petition was filed seeking quashing of the communication received by the petitioner dated September 18.
The bench examined the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Education Institutions (Regulation of admissions full time professional undergraduate law course) Rules, 2017.
The court said-
“Perusal of the rule of eligibility requires a candidate to possess 45% marks for all the parts of degree examination together. The rule do not specify whether candidate is from old or new pattern since a candidate become eligible for admission to LLB degree course if he has completed his graduation or post­graduation   any   faculty/discipline of knowledge of any University in Maharashtra established by an Act of parliament or by State Legislature or National Institution recognized as deemed University and therefore instead of prescribing a criteria prevalent in Mumbai University as to old/ new course, the rules prescribed that a candidate must possess 45% marks for all the parts of degree examination taken together.”
Thus, the court concluded that the denial of admission was erroneous.
The Petitioner who has scored 59.41% of marks in aggregate for all the three years of his graduation, satisfies the eligibility criteria prescribed by the rules and we are of the clear opinion that deprivation of the petitioner from the process of admission is erroneous.
We fail to understand the reasoning of Respondent no.2 in holding the petitioner ineligible only on the ground that in the new course of the Bombay University, a class/degree is to be awarded a candidate only on the basis of the marks in the final year examination. We see no logical justification in the said restriction and therefore we are inclined to allow the Writ Petition.” 
Therefore, the petition was allowed and Commissioner, CET, was asked to grant the admission.