Law schools slowly relax attendance rules as LLB students seek internships, flexible learning

By Musab Qazi & Sheena Sachdeva

The Delhi High Court (HC), in a recent judgment, held that no law student should be barred from appearing for exams due to lack of sufficient attendance. The order, which emanated from a suo moto petition launched by the Supreme Court (SC) a decade ago, also called upon the Bar Council of India (BCI) to review its stringent attendance norms.

The verdict has given fresh fodder to an issue causing problems at the country’s top law schools. The mandatory attendance policy has long been a bone of contention between the law faculty and college administration looking to ensure ‘discipline’ and students seeking a more flexible approach towards learning. While the verdict has given fillip to the students’ push for doing away with the mandatory attendance, or at least relaxing it in some measures, the institutes have expressed reservations about potential reforms in attendance policy, and have asserted that the scope of HC’s judgement is limited to the institutes in Delhi.

Nevertheless, post-verdict, some of the law education institutes have announced changes in their attendance policy. The National Law University (NLU) Delhi, which is within the territorial jurisdiction of HC, stopped detaining students for want of attendance and allowed the defaulters to submit an assignment to compensate for their absence.

OP Jindal Global University (JGU) at Sonipat, Haryana, which includes Jindal Global Law School (JGLS), also did away with the mandatory attendance requirement as the pre-condition for taking end-semester tests for all its programmes. Symbiosis International, a deemed-to-be university in Pune, said it will accord students various remedial measures mentioned in HC after the ongoing cycle of law exams.

Even before the judgment, law schools had been grappling with the question of mandatory attendance, and how strictly it should be followed. In recent years, the attendance policies at some law colleges have undergone changes, generally in a more lax direction, to allow students to participate in various extracurricular activities as well as internships.

For instance, the Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU Mumbai), which until 2023 had a very strict 75% class attendance mandate without any recourse, has allowed 5% relaxation for medical reasons. The institute is now also considering letting the fourth and fifth-year students take a month-long internship per semester.

Law school attendance policies

Most higher education institutes in the country, including law schools, have mandatory attendance policies in line with the rules prescribed by the regulatory bodies, such as the University Grants Commission (UGC) and BCI. The UGC (Minimum Standards of Instruction for the Grant of the First Degree through Formal Education) Regulations, 2003 prescribed a minimum of 75% attendance in lectures, tutorials, seminars and practicals as the eligibility criterion for appearing for exams. However, in 2025, the commission in its revised regulations, allowed the higher education institutes to decide their own minimum attendance requirement. This was done to facilitate “diverse learning modes and holistic and multidisciplinary learning opportunities” suggested by the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

However, BCI, the apex governing body for law colleges and universities, has stuck to its 2003 Legal Education Rules, which mandate 70% classroom presence in each subject, with a 5% relaxation under “exceptional circumstances”, and that too at the discretion of the institute’s head.

NLUs, the top public law education institutes in the country, too, have mandatory attendance requirements albeit with slight variations in the threshold. There’s a great difference, though, in their enforcement, with some actually detaining those who fail to meet the benchmark while others find ways to accommodate them. The allowance rules for participating in extracurricular activities, inter-college competitions and internships are also far from uniform.

BCI attendance rules hamper internships

One of the key demands raised by the students across the institutes is to have a clear and generous ‘on duty’ or ‘deemed present’ policy for those partaking in extracurricular activities and taking up internships.

A student at MNLU Mumbai informs that while their institute is sufficiently considerate towards the defaulters, it allows only two days of deemed presence per semester for inter-college competitions and events. “We are concerned because it's not enough. The travelling and preparation for competitions require much more time. I have to go through a long bureaucratic process of submitting travel details etc. to avail more days off,” he said, adding: “If they had a proper policy about 5-7 days of assured deemed attendance, it would have been better.”

The students are particularly anxious about attendance requirements getting in the way of finding lucrative internship opportunities, which are increasingly becoming key to getting a headstart and employment in the legal profession. An NLU Delhi student said, “The deemed presence facility is only available in higher classes. Many students get mid-semester internships. More than campus placements, the pre-placement offers (PPOs) are now the main route for hiring.”

The institutes have begun providing windows for students to take up on-job training roles. While MNLU Mumbai is mulling a ‘deemed attendance’ policy for interns in higher classes, NLU Jodhpur, last year, extended the summer break from one-and-half months to two months to accommodate the working students.

However, some law schools, like West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences (WBNUJS) Kolkata, are yet to have any norms in place for condoning internship absence. The students at the premier law school have been pushing for a relaxation, but to no avail. “I will be going for internships next year, but there’s no policy on attendance relaxation for that in place”, said Nilabja Majumdar, in fourth-year of a five-year LLB programme.

While the Delhi HC judgment meant that the institute didn’t enforce attendance rules this year despite many students missing their classes due to a protest against the vice chancellor Nirmal Kanti Chakrabarti over a sexual harassment complaint, they fear that they won’t get any leeway next year. This is because the defaulters were made to sign an undertaking saying that the “conditional approval” given to the students won’t be used as a precedent. “The language of the undertaking was very confusing. We didn’t understand what it entailed,” adds Majumdar.

The student body at National Academy of Legal Studies and Research (NALSAR) Hyderabad is similarly petitioning the institute’s administration to alter its attendance policy.

“With UGC relaxing the long-standing 75% mandate entirely in favour of institutional autonomy, allowing institutes to design models suited to their academic ethos, and the HC judgment in Sushant Rohilla directly questioning BCI's rigid attendance framework, the imperative to reimagine legal education has arrived decisively… We're currently engaging with the administration on comprehensive attendance reform in this light, and we're confident NALSAR will once again set the benchmark positively,” said Mohamed Ashik, convenor, Academic Committee, Student Bar Council, NALSAR Hyderabad.

NLU Delhi changes; NALSAR Hyderabad doesn’t

The NALSAR administration, however, isn’t particularly moved by the HC’s order. “The Delhi HC’s jurisdiction is primarily limited to the state of Delhi. If BCI changes its rule of mandatory attendance in reference to Delhi High Court judgment then the discussion on the attendance policy will happen. Otherwise, maybe the institutions in Delhi may have to look at the judgement more seriously. This is not applicable to all NLUs in India,” said VC Srikrishna Deva Rao.

A faculty member at NLU Tripura also echoes that the judgment only has "persuasive" value for law schools outside Delhi and deferred to the regulator for any changes in attendance norms. “The moment the judgment came, students came to me. Because they wanted relaxation. But the question is how can we honour Delhi HC judgment in Tripura?” said the teacher.

And while NLU Delhi had to adopt the verdict, the change in policy still failed to satisfy students. “While earlier in the month we received a mail saying that the defaulters will have to write an assignment under the college’s supervision – much like end-term papers – but following en-masse mailing by the students they retreated and allowed submission of assignments on the varsity’s Enterprise Resource Planning [ERP] system,” said the NLU Delhi student.

In contrast, some of the private law schools were quick to accept the verdict. Within days of the judgment, JGU sent an email to its students, calling it an “important landmark” order. “JGU, being a multidisciplinary, progressive and responsible higher education institution, has decided to do away with the minimum attendance requirement as an eligibility for appearing in the end-semester examinations across all programmes till further notice. This decision has been taken as an abundant caution, and to ensure full compliance with the Delhi High Court’s judgement,” reads the communique.

Symbiosis International, in a notice issued a couple of weeks later, said that since many of the end-semester exams of some law programmes are already over and some were still underway, the judgment would be given effect later. “A detailed policy on remedial measures, in full compliance with the Hon'ble Delhi High Court Judgment, shall be communicated separately to all students of the three year and five-year law programmes,” said the notice.

Some law colleges have also begun displaying the students’ monthly attendance on the notice boards, as asked by the court.

LLB Attendance: ‘Seeking obedience’

Beyond the question of laws and regulations, the fight over attendance, at its heart, is one about contrasting philosophies and approach to education itself. While the administrators, and some of the teachers and even students, believe that compulsory attendance is the only way to make students attend classes and instill discipline, others contend that it infantalises college-goers, ignores their diverse needs and aspirations and puts onus of classroom engagement on them rather than the teachers.

“The attendance policy is liberal in most of the universities, except a few ones, to the detriment of education, especially legal education. Law already has a bad reputation in the sense that it’s [seen] the last-resort option. Attendance must be compulsory in all universities and colleges if one wants to ensure good legal professionals. Every student must attend the class, and take the project presentations seriously. If they don’t learn the technicalities of law, how will they deliver in court?” said the Allahabad University faculty.

“Professors here feel that the judgment is compromising with the discipline of the academic world,” adds an MNLU Mumbai teacher. He, however, acknowledges that the court took a “holistic” view of attendance problems.

On the other hand, some argue that forcing students to attend classes they don’t like can be counterproductive. “Those who come to class unwillingly often cause disturbance. Doing away with mandatory attendance will enhance the quality of classroom engagement. It also allows students to pursue different career trajectories,” said Hamza Khan, another NALSAR student, echoing the Delhi HC verdict.

The Delhi HC emphasised the holistic nature of legal education as the main ground for instituting more flexible attendance norms. “The classroom education has to be coupled with practical training, knowledge of court systems, prison systems, legal aid, gaining practical experience through participation in moot courts, seminars, model parliament, debates, attending court hearings etc. These activities need to be weaved into the legal curriculum in a manner that ensures multi-dimensional learning and training of law students, which would not be possible with strict mandatory attendance requirements,” reads the judgment.

The court also made the case for ensuring better classroom participation through a feedback loop between teachers and students, rather than rigid norms. The judges pointed out that the students tend to attend lectures that are more engaging and interesting.

Majumdar, who was recently awarded at an essay competition in Vienna, was pleasantly surprised to learn that the concept of mandatory attendance was alien to his European peers.

Yet, some students think that it’s not a bad idea to have some rules in place, especially at the lower levels. “We don’t have any personal disciplining measures. One should consider that students are still very young – most are teenagers or in their early 20s. In the initial years, they are confused about their career and things could get chaotic. Most of us are ambitious and tend to get more sincere in senior years,” said the NLU Delhi student.

The MNLU Mumbai student agrees. “The mandatory attendance is a need, but students being debarred is a bit too much. They can be given opportunities like submitting assignments. For some professors and subjects, it's very difficult to find motivation to attend the lectures,” he said.