Despite the Delhi HC judgment and long-standing demands by students for a relaxation on the attendance policy, NALSAR has yet again given out plenty of yearbooks simply for not meeting the attendance quota. Even final year students who had PPOs were not spared.
Of all the pressures law school already has, its genuinely not reasonable to have such strict attendence policies. I hope the SC passes an order stopping this. There have been many instances where even genuine reasons for lack of attendnece have not been met. A student told the UG chair (▮▮▮) that they were suicidal and her response was "everyone is suicidal lately". I have given up hope

Honestly, good on NALSAR for remaining stringent on the bare minimum criteria. As a final year law student who has done multiple running internships during on semesters, It is more than possible to manage attendance with internship requirements. In a 4 month semester, without any exemptions or deemed, you can take almost a month off on your own attendance quota. Add in the exemptions you’d get for interning, mooring, etc. and this number can go up to another few weeks. All in all, out of 60 mandated classes, by yourself you get to miss around 18 (assuming 70% attendance requirement as per BCI guidelines) and another 10 days we say as exemptions for internships or moots (although I’m sure the number will be far higher). So you miss 28 lectures out of 60, leaving 32 for you to attend. That’s almost 50% of the classes you’d have to attend in a semester (but it will be even lower, since the above is a very conservative estimate).

If despite this you can’t attend even the remainder of classes, it’s 100% on the students. And there’s no reason a university wouldn’t validate a genuine reason, like long-term illness or bereavement unless the genuine reason for you is: I was interning and hence couldn’t attend half the classes. It’s also super unfair to students who maintain their attendance despite multiple commitments to let slackers write the same exams as them.

I went to Nalsar. I have two exams with juniors because I didn’t have attendance. It doesn’t seem like it at the time. But enforcing that rule was a good thing Nalsar did for me. I needed to learn there were consequences to my actions. No one misses 25% of their classes by mistake right ? I was embarrassed at the time. I thought my career was over. But of course it wasn’t over. And that experience made me determined to never be so stupid again. I worked a hundred times harder at my first job. Stuff is better and more fun when you show up and work hard. I didn’t have any issues with work performance after and it’s because someone cared enough to enforce rules.

To let young students do as they please without consequences is not about caring for them- it’s about taking the easy way out as the admin and a teacher.

Let's look at it this way. If you aren't attending a certain percentage of classes for a subject, then how are you going to get certified to have studied the subject and attained a minimum level of proficiency? The answer is, by clearing all the evaluation for the subject without any leniency. As a teacher, my stand has always been that if a student does not attend my classes but still clears all my evaluation, then the student has surely demonstrated their proficiency nonetheless. What right do I have to deny him such certification? If anything, I should question the relevance of my classes and my evaluation methods if clearing the latter is possible without attending the former. However, there should not be any scope for multiple exams in the same year, extension of dates for assignments, excusing not turning up for vivas or presentation or any other type of leniency in the evaluation.

I am a S survivor, having tried it in and before law school, and even I agree with that statement. Its used too loosely and discredits real problems like abuse and S@, which drove me. So many people are quick to through the "taking l*$e" shit for the slightest discomforts omg

The Delhi HC judgement is only jurisdictionally valid in the state of Delhi btw, and we all know what is going to come with this at the Supreme Court. Honestly, good on them, i really hope the university fights fiercely against these kids' dads in courts and he other slackers. This country is so flooded with mediocrity because of "chalta hai" attitude, especially the judiciary. About time we institute strict enforcement of penalties (written in your university regulations btw)

The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.