The Legal Education - Law Commission of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

30“The regulatory structure for legal education in India iscurrently seriously flawed and needs careful reconsideration.A typical law college has four masters at a minimum: theUniversity to which it is affiliated; the State Government, theUniversity Grants Commission and the Bar Council of India.These four agencies have varying mandates, interests andconstituencies and do not provide coherent guidance for theimprovement of legal education in the country.”It also says:There is wide concern among legal academics that they are notadequately consulted currently by any of these authorities.”“Of course, the further suggestion is to form an All IndiaLegal Education Council on the model of AICTE for technicaleducation and that the BCI would then be responsible only forregulating entry into the legal profession and maintenance ofprofessional standards rather than for legal education”.But, we feel that if ‘legal education’ is kept totally out of the purviewof the BCI and its role is limited only to admission to profession anddiscipline of lawyers, it may not be able to prescribe a definite course oflegal education which can meet the needs of the Bar. As at present, theLaw Commission feels that there are practical difficulties in the way of thesuggestion to exclude the BCI totally from legal education. Such a
31decision cannot be taken without consulting the Bar and the Judiciary. Wedo not propose to go into this further suggestion for the reason givenbelow.3.7 The criticism that the Ahmadi Committee recommended only onemember of the Faculty to be on the Legal Education Committee is, in ourview, justified. But, the other view, that the Bar Council and Judges shouldhave nothing to do with legal education cannot be accepted in as much as,under Entries 77 and 78 of List I, the subject matter of legislation is‘practice in courts’ and the Advocates Act, 1961 is a law made for thatpurpose. As pointed out in Chapter II, though generally, in the matter of‘standards of legal education’ the UGC or the Universities may haveprimacy, in the matter of standards of legal education for those studentswho will practice in Courts, the primacy is of the Bar and the Judiciary.This was the view of the Setalved Committee also in the 14 th Report. Butat the same time, that does not mean that the law teachers have no place inthe fixing of the standards. In our view, there must be discussion by theBar Council of India with the Universities or with, as proposed, a body oflegal faculty, representative of the law teaching community in the entirecountry, to be nominated by the UGC. We are of the view that theproposal made in this Chapter and the next Chapter (viz., Chapter IV), willbalance the roles of the Bar, Judiciary and the law teachers and once thenumber of teachers in the Legal Education Committee is increased, therewill be no room for any grievance.3.8 Here, we may mention that in the next chapter, i.e. Chapter IV, weare recommending the constitution of a Legal Education Committee of the
Page 1 and 2: Law Commission of India184 th Repor
Page 3 and 4: 3colleges for prescribing standards
Page 5 and 6: 5CONTENTSPAGESCh. I Introductory 1-
Page 7 and 8: 7suggestions, while some others opp
Page 9 and 10: 9in as much as it did not formulate
Page 11 and 12: 11Conference of Heads of Legal Educ
Page 13 and 14: 13subjects are: the respective role
Page 15 and 16: 15recommendations. The Commission w
Page 17 and 18: 17considering the provisions of ano
Page 19 and 20: 19The Advocates Act, 1961 thus deal
Page 21 and 22: 212.10 If the UGC Act, 1956 is expr
Page 23 and 24: 23subject of legal education comes
Page 25 and 26: 25“In the field of legal educatio
Page 27 and 28: 27between the Bar Council of India
Page 29: 29Court Judge are now in the Commit
Page 33 and 34: 33In case, during the tenure of the
Page 35 and 36: 35(4) All questions which come up b
Page 37 and 38: 37Education Committee and who are i
Page 39 and 40: 39the absence of a consensus, the m
Page 41 and 42: 414.7 It must be noted that standar
Page 43 and 44: 434.10 As to the co-ordination betw
Page 45 and 46: 45In the Karnataka High Court Judgm
Page 47 and 48: 47the proposals for the consultatio
Page 49 and 50: 49(a) two law teachers in office fr
Page 51 and 52: 51aspects and we propose to lay emp
Page 53 and 54: 535.6 Rule 9(1) lists 6 subjects fo
Page 55 and 56: 55skill to identify the administrat
Page 57 and 58: 57(6) preparing for negotiation, co
Page 59 and 60: 59technologies which require corres
Page 61 and 62: 61education and laying standards in
Page 63 and 64: 63years, the number of civil matter
Page 65 and 66: 65formulated may be adopted by the
Page 67 and 68: 67Procedure, even though they have
Page 69 and 70: 69Chapter VIIAdjunct Teachers from
Page 71 and 72: 71“And there is no need to fit sq
Page 73 and 74: 73“The adjunct teachers teach the
Page 75 and 76: 75High Court or Supreme Court or be
Page 77 and 78: 77students who will go to the Bar o
Page 79 and 80: 79Inspections:8.4 As per section 7(
Page 81 and 82:
81India, when it wields powers, is
Page 83 and 84:
83one where the college is proposed
Page 85 and 86:
85(The existing section 7A should b
Page 87 and 88:
877C. (1) Where there is a differen
Page 89 and 90:
89(vii) The following clause be add
Page 91 and 92:
919.3 Whatever be the percentage of
Page 93 and 94:
939.10 Prof. Myron Moskovitz of the
Page 95 and 96:
95malpractices. We are only referri
Page 97 and 98:
97get acquainted with several pract
Page 99 and 100:
99Chapter XEducation on Legal Educa
Page 101 and 102:
10110.3 Several of the above Commit
Page 103 and 104:
103colleges located in cities and d
Page 105 and 106:
105Chapter XIDerecognition of Unive
Page 107 and 108:
107Chapter XIITraining and Apprenti
Page 109 and 110:
109The court held that once the rel
Page 111 and 112:
111include problem method, moot cou
Page 114 and 115:
114advocates as well as the requisi
Page 116 and 117:
116senior counsel in these big citi
Page 118 and 119:
11812.17 There is a strong view tha
Page 120 and 121:
120graduates are proposed to be rec
Page 122 and 123:
122Chapter XIIIDisqualification of
Page 124 and 125:
12413.4 Therefore, we are of the em
Page 126 and 127:
1264) Clause (b) of subsection (2)
Page 128 and 129:
128Advocates Act, 1961 for providin
Page 130 and 131:
130prescribe higher standards.(para
Page 132 and 133:
132be amended.Consequently, section
Page 134 and 135:
13430) Section 7(1) (i) to be amend
show all

The Legal Education - Law Commission of India

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?