HC proposes panel for attendance norms in varsities

The Delhi high court has proposed the formation of a committee to develop “uniform practices” regarding attendance norms for undergraduate and postgraduate courses in universities across the country, acknowledging the need for a fresh evaluation of mandatory attendance requirements in light of changes in teaching methods in a post-pandemic landscape.
A bench comprising justices Prathiba Singh and Amit Sharma emphasised that the current approach to mandatory attendance is being viewed differently by the younger generation, which contrasts with traditional perspectives on education.
“Education is no longer restricted to classroom or textbook teaching and has been extended to more practical areas, including various skill programmes such as Skill India,” the bench stated in its August 21 order, which was released on Tuesday.
Issuing notices to the Centre, the National Medical Commission, and the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), the court stressed on the importance of incorporating the views of various stakeholders, and posted the matter for further hearing on September 9.
The court’s deliberation arose from a plea originally taken up by the Supreme Court in 2016, following the alleged suicide of a student at Amity Law University, who was barred from taking exams due to insufficient attendance. The Supreme Court transferred the case to the high court in March 2017.
On August 21, the court underscored the necessity to reconsider attendance norms, questioning whether mandatory attendance should continue to be enforced or if alternative standards should be set.
“There is an imminent need, therefore, to have reconsideration of norms of attendance in general, whether it ought to be made mandatory at all or what should be the minimum required standards of attendance, or should attendance be encouraged rather than penalties being imposed for lack of attendance etc. In these circumstances, this Court intends to form a Committee to study all the above factors and to place a report before the Court so that certain uniform practices can be evolved for undergraduate and postgraduate courses in respect of attendance requirements,” the court stated in its nine-page order.
The bench stressed that the issue should be addressed on a broader scale, considering various factors, including the impact of attendance norms on students’ mental health and financial situations.
“This issue deserves to be addressed at a much higher level rather than restricting it to any specific course/college/university/institution. Regulatory bodies as also some universities have in their statutes/ordinances, historically, prescribed mandatory attendance requirements. The mental health of students, which is also affected due to the mandatory attendance norms, needs to be borne in mind while reconsidering attendance requirements,” the court observed.
It also pointed out the need for a more streamlined grievance redressal mechanism in educational institutions and suggested that distinctions may be necessary between professional and non-professional courses in terms of attendance requirements.