Justices Khanwilkar & Dinesh Maheshwari Recuse From NSLIU’s Appeal In Case Related To Sitting Judge’s Son Promotion

Justices Khanwilkar & Dinesh Maheshwari Recuse From NSLIU’s Appeal In Case Related To Sitting Judge’s Son Promotion
X

Supreme Court judge(s), Justice Khanwilkar and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari recused from hearing an appeal filed by National Law School University of India (“NLSIU”) challenging the Karnataka High Court order which granted admission to son of sitting Karnataka High Court Justice PB Bajanthri of who had previously been denied admission to the next academic year due to failing a subject.

The matter was listed before the Bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Aniruddha Bose.

When the matter was called for hearing, Justice AM Khanwilkar said, “List these matters before appropriate Bench wherein two of us, (A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.), are not Members.”

An appeal was filed against Karnataka High Court order dated March 30, 2021 wherein bench of Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty had dismissed an appeal filed by National Law School of India (NLSIU) Bangalore against an order granting admission to the son of a sitting Karnataka High Court Justice PB Bajanthri of who had previously been denied admission to the next academic year due to a subject failure.

In November of last year, the Karnataka High Court overturned NLSIU orders refusing student advancement to the next year. The student had received an ‘F’ grade from the university because he had plagiarised a thesis.

He was also barred from taking the third trimester’s Special Repeat Examination for progression to the fourth year.

Since the University’s orders were overturned by the High Court, NLISU filed had filed an appeal with the High Court’s Division Bench.

The University’s Registrar had told the Bench of Justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Vishwajith Shetty that the student had earned an “A” in another project assigned to him. The previous thesis and its outcome became irrelevant since the student just had to do one more project.

As a result, the Court had decided:

“In view of the above, and since the student was subsequently assigned another assignment by the University, no further orders in the present writ appeal are needed, and the same stands disposed of accordingly.”

Case Title: National Law School Of India University Versus Hruday P.B. And Anr.| SLP(C) No. 007367 of 2021

Next Story