In a writ petition filed by a student before the Karnataka High Court seeking directions to quash the request of National Law School of India University (NLSIU), Bengaluru asking for a specific learning disability certificate from a qualified mental health professional, a Single Judge Bench of Justice R Devdas held that NLSIU had provided the best options and directed the University to take a liberal approach for the petitioner to clear the first year.
The instant petition was filed by a student (petitioner) pleading to direct NLSIU to provide an alternate subject for Economics. The petitioner also pleaded the Court to quash certain communications made by NLSIU and to direct them for creating policy and learning resources while keeping in mind the disabilities faced by certain students.
The petitioner, enrolled in the 5 years B.A., LL. B (Hons.) Programme in July 2024, contended that she was suffering from a learning disability known as ‘Dyscalculia’ which resulted in difficulty while learning, comprehending, and performing mathematical calculations. It was contended that the petitioner’s school gave her the special privilege of a substitute subject and extra time after sixth grade.
Therefore, the petitioner requested to the Vice Chancellor at NLSIU to take up the matter with the Academic Review Committee to make an exception for her as she was unable to understand Economics. To this, the Academic Administration of NLSIU replied that the University does not provide a substitute for the core subjects and that alternate questions, which do not test her calculation abilities, could be provided to her upon submission of a supporting document.
An exemption letter from the National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (NIMHANS), Bengaluru that recommended exemption of Mathematics was shared by the petitioner, to which the Academic Administration replied. Their reply stated that since the certificate provided by the petitioner dated back to 2016, she would have to provide a current certificate of disability issued by a competent medical/mental health professional.
The Court permitted NLSIU to reconsider the petitioner’s request after she provided a fresh certificate issued by NIMHANS on 28-06-2025, while having regard to Regulation 11.3 of the National Law School of India University Academic and Examination Regulations, 2022 (Regulations).
The petitioner contended that Regulation 11.3 of the Regulations provided that a student may request for reasonable accommodations including accessible course materials, assignments, and any other reasonable accommodation that may be necessary for students to have an equal opportunity for participating in their academic programme. It was also contended that since a student is required to take one major subject and two minor subjects, she could not be forced to study Economics or Economy.
NLSIU submitted that the University had prepared the curriculum of the course to fulfil the requirement of Clause 6 of Schedule – II of the BCI Rules of Legal Education, 2008. It was also mentioned that the curriculum of NLSIU did not offer major or minor subjects in the first year as general subjects are prescribed for the students to touch upon the basics. It was further contended that the petitioner had failed in 8 out of 12 subjects in the first year and got re-admitted to the first year in 2025-26.
It was further submitted that the Academic Administration had come to a conclusion that the petitioner could drop out of ‘numbers’ course and could be enrolled in ‘History of Economic Thought’, which would ensure that she would have nothing to do with numbers.
The Court noted that NLSIU had provided the petitioner a choice to opt out of the ‘numbers course’ and had also said that alternate question papers for in-class assignments and end term exams would be given to her for subjects involving mathematical calculations, so that only the concepts of the petitioner are tested.
Further, the Court stated that as per the Rules of the BCI, the choice of subjects is restricted in the initial years and no option for choosing major and minor subjects is available in the first year.
Thus, while disposing of the petition, the Court opined that NLSIU had given regard to the petitioner’s disability and provided her with the best options. Lastly, the Court directed NLSIU to take a liberal approach to enable the petitioner to clear the first year if she clears all other subjects except Economy.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Party-in-person
For Respondents – AGA B.P. Radha, Adv Aditya Narayan, Adv Anubha Srivastava, Adv Anusha Asundi, Adv A. Madhusudhana Rao
