The Legal Education - Law Commission of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8UGC, in its letter remarked that unfortunately in the Working Paperprepared by the Law Commission, no reference was made to the Report ofthe above Expert Committee.It further stated that the UGC Panel on legal education “was lookingforward for better inter-action among UGC and BCI, among others.” TheUGC then gave its views with regard to Chapters I and II of the LawCommission’s Working Paper. It referred to the proposed amendments tosec. 7(1)(h) and sec. 10(2)(b). Seeking greater representation for the lawteachers in the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India itsuggested that in the said Committee, it would not be necessary to have asmembers, the Secretary UGC or the Secretary, Ministry of Law as was thecase at present and that the Director of National Law School, Bangaloreneed not also be a member as proposed. It was stated that the UGC wasconstitutionally empowered to deal with ‘Standards of Legal Education’. Itmay here be stated that the above Expert Committee referred to by UGC,in its Report also regretted that the B.C.I. had not consulted either theUniversities or the UGC, at any stage. Various other suggestions weremade in the above letter on other matters.1.4 We may here add that a fresh ‘UGC Model Curriculum’ wasprepared in the year 2001 by the Curriculum Development Committee(CDC) constituted by the UGC in the year 2000. (This runs into 500 pages)In fact, the UGC panel on law had initiated the work of revision andupdating of the LL.M. and LL.B. (Hons) syllabi prepared by theCurriculum Development Committee in 1988-1990. It was stated that theBar Council of India has already presented texts of the course for LL.B. but
9in as much as it did not formulate detailed subjects, the CDC was taking upthe matter. This Committee for LL.M. and LL.B. (Hons) consisted of Prof.C.M. Jariwala, Prof. N.S. Chandrashekharan, Prof. V.K. Bhansal, Prof.K.L. Bhatia, Prof. Mool Chand Sharma, Prof. Hargopal Reddy, Prof. T.Bhattacharya and Prof. P. Leelakrishnan as Convenor. The Committee toformulate LL.B. syllabus had eight members which included Prof. RanbirSingh & Prof. M. Pinheiro also. The New Report of the CDC of the UGCis dated 9.3.2001.Report of the Parliamentary Committee on Subordinate Legislation (1993-94):1.5 The attention of the Law Commission has also been drawn toanother Report, namely the Fifteenth Report of the ParliamentaryCommittee on Subordinate Legislation (1993-94)which is in sevenChapters, which deals with various aspects concerning the legal profession.Chapter VI of the said Report deals with ‘Continuing Legal Education andRestructuring the Law Course’ and Chapter VII deals with ‘Renewal ofRegistration’. It appears that this Report has not also been referred to inthe Working Paper prepared by the Law Commission.Views of the Faculty:1.6 On the side of the Faculty, the Commission received the viewsarrived at in the national conference of law teachers, viz., the All IndiaTeachers Congress (22-25 Jan, 1999), held at the Faculty of Law,University of Delhi. The said Conference was attended by law teachers
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: 7suggestions, while some others opp
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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?