The Legal Education - Law Commission of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

82and the Court had occasion to refer to the Regulations framed by theAICTE Act which gave some solutions. The AICTE has powers similar tothe Bar Council of India. Regulation 8(4) provides that at the stage ofinitial grant of approval, the Bureau of the Council seekscomments/recommendations of(i)(ii)the State Government concerned,the affiliating Universityapart from the regional bodies of the AICTE. Regulation 8(5) requires theRegional Office to arrange visits by an expert committee constituted by theAICTE which will put forward its recommendations before the AICTE.Reg. 8(8) states that if there is disagreement between the recommendationsmade by the State Government, University or the Regional Office of theAICTE, then the Central Task Force shall invite representatives of therespective agencies for further consultations before makingrecommendations. On the recommendations of the Central Task Force, theAICTE will take a final decision. Regulation 8(10) states that the decisionof the AICTE shall be communicated to the State Government concernedor the UGC, as the case may be, and to the University concerned before the30 th of April of the next year where the applications for starting aninstitution are made before the 31 st December of the previous year. TheTask Force would also consist of a member of the Subordinate Judiciary, atthe level of a District & Sessions Judge.We recommend that the Inspection Rules framed by the Bar Council ofIndia be also amended providing that among the members of the InspectionCommittee, at least one academician from a different State other than the
83one where the college is proposed to be established or is alreadyestablished, must be included.We also recommend that separate provisions be incorporated in theAdvocates Act, 1961 for providing that in case of any conflict in theinspection reports of the Bar Council of India and of the UGC/Universitiesor where there is a big gap between the claims of the management and theInspection Committee, a Task Force should make inspection on the samelines as in the Regulations of the AICTE in which a Judicial Officer wouldbe a member.These recommendations should not be considered by the BarCouncil of India as diluting the authority of its inspection committees, butas one intended to prevent complaints in regard to the inspection processand in fact, such a procedure is now followed in respect of EngineeringColleges by the AICTE. The inspections by the Committees of the BarCouncil of India must be open and transparent and principles of fairnessand natural justice must be strictly followed. A complaint against aninspection should not be viewed as a dispute between adversaries but as afact-finding mission consistent with principles of natural justice. In fact, ifthe findings of the Task Force confirm the findings of the Bar Council ofIndia’s inspection committees, it would only enhance the strength of thefindings of the Inspection Committee of the Bar Council of India.8.13 We, therefore, recommend that(i) for the purpose of obtaining prior permission from the BarCouncil of India by the law colleges and law department of auniversity or any other institution, a separate provision beincorporated in the form of section 7A, namely:
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 and 30:
29Court Judge are now in the Commit
Page 31 and 32: 31decision cannot be taken without
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: 81India, when it wields powers, is
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?