Answer

Introduction

The Sushant Rohilla case exposed the tragic consequence of rigid attendance rules being used as punishment rather than support. In this regard, the Delhi High Court’s ruling highlights that rigid attendance enforcement, without notice or counselling, violates constitutional guarantees of fairness and natural justice. It establishes that academic autonomy cannot override students’ dignity, due process, and mental well-being under Articles 14 and 21.

Body

Violation of Constitutional Fairness & Natural Justice

• Arbitrariness vs. Article 14: Rigid, automatic debarment applies a one-size-fits-all rule without individual assessment, breaching non-arbitrariness.
  Eg: Delhi HC held mechanical debarment unconstitutional in Sushant Rohilla Case.
• Right to be heard (audi alteram partem): Students were excluded without prior notice, counselling or an opportunity to explain.
  Eg: Court required notice and chance to represent before debarment.
• Dignity & Mental Well-being (Article 21): Punitive exclusion aggravates stress and undermines dignity, impacting life with dignity.
• Opacity & Administrative Misuse: Lack of transparent attendance records enables arbitrary decisions.
• Ignoring valid academic engagement: Rigid rules do not recognise learning outside classrooms such as research or internships.
  Eg: Judgment stated experiential learning (legal aid, moots, internships) must count toward attendance.

Why Attendance Policies Are Still Necessary

• Ensures Academic Engagement and Classroom Learning: It promotes interaction, peer learning, and continuous academic engagement that self-study cannot fully replace.
  Eg: NEP 2020 emphasises “active and participatory learning environments,” which require consistent classroom presence.
• Builds Professional Discipline and Time Management: Attendance norms cultivate punctuality and accountability, skills required in professional institutions and personal conduct.
  Eg: Bar Council of India (BCI) mandates attendance minimums to ensure students develop professional habits expected in litigation and court practice.
• Prevents Free-Riding & Maintains Academic Standards: It discourages students from benefiting from classroom learning, group discussions, or peer work without participating.
  Eg: NIRF top law schools link attendance with seminar participation and internal assessments to maintain academic integrity.
• Supports Continuous Internal Assessment and Mentoring: Regular attendance helps faculty track academic progress, detect stress, and intervene early when learning issues appear.
  Eg: UGC (2003) directs universities to use continuous internal evaluation, possible only when students are present consistently.
• Enhances Student Safety and Institutional Responsibility: Attendance norms allow universities to track student well-being and ensure timely intervention in cases of distress or sudden absence.

Reforms to Build a Student-Centric and Accountable Framework

• Due Process Before Debarment: Attendance shortage should trigger counselling, academic support and hearing, not instant punishment.
  Eg: HC mandated counselling + representation before any punitive action.
• Transparent Attendance Tracking: Universities must publish regular attendance data to avoid “surprise debarment.”
  Eg: Court directed weekly attendance disclosure and monthly shortage alerts to prevent opaque decision-making.
• Count Academic Engagement Beyond Classroom Hours: Experiential learning like internships, research and moot court are valid learning processes and must contribute to attendance recognition. 
• Institutional Accountability Through Grievance Redressal: Disciplinary decisions must be reasoned, appealable, and include students in committees.
• Flexibility for Medical/Mental Health Hardship: Attendance shortage due to health issues must be accommodated through extra classes or assignments.
  Eg: Universities must record medical/mental health conditions before taking punitive steps.

Conclusion

The Sushant Rohilla judgment reinforces that attendance is not just a number but a matter of dignity, fairness and due process. Universities must move from punitive rigidity to supportive academic ecosystems where participation is encouraged, mental well-being is protected, and learning—not control—is the objective.

DOWNLOAD PDF