The Delhi High Court on Wednesday noted the urgent need to reconsider mandatory attendance requirements in colleges and universities, citing significant changes in teaching methods since the COVID-19 pandemic.
The court emphasised the importance of considering the impact on students’ mental health when evaluating attendance requirements, and highlighted the need to streamline grievance redressal mechanisms and support systems within educational institutions.
A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Amit Sharma stated that the question of whether attendance requirements should be mandatory in undergraduate and postgraduate courses. This needs to be addressed at a broader, higher level, rather than being confined to any particular course, college, university, or institution.
The bench suggested that rather than penalising students for low attendance, there should be incentives to encourage class attendance.
The court expressed its intention to establish a committee to study these issues and present a report, aiming to develop uniform practices for attendance requirements in undergraduate and postgraduate courses.
The Delhi High Court was hearing a case initiated by the Supreme Court in September 2016, concerning the alleged suicide of a student from Amity Law University. The matter was transferred to the Delhi High Court in March 2017.
Sushant Rohilla, a third-year law student at Amity, tragically took his own life at home on August 10, 2016, after the university reportedly barred him from taking semester exams due to insufficient attendance.
Addressing the issue, the high court observed that regulatory bodies and some universities have traditionally mandated attendance requirements in their statutes and ordinances.
It highlighted the urgent need to reconsider these norms, questioning whether attendance should be mandatory, what the required level of attendance should be, and whether it would be more effective to encourage attendance rather than impose penalties for non-compliance.
