Supreme Court asks Centre to consider setting up expert panel for legal education reforms

The Supreme Court on Tuesday asked the Central government to consider setting up an expert body to examine issues concerning legal education in India [Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v Union of India & Ors].

A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana held that such a body was particularly relevant in the present era.

“This is an important matter. The Union of India should consider it. This is an era of expert bodies. There should be an expert body on legal education,” said CJI Kant.

The Court made the observation while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay. The plea sought the constitution of a Legal Education Commission or expert committee comprising educationists, jurists, retired judges, advocates and professors.

It also sought a review of the existing legal education framework, including the syllabus, curriculum and duration of Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) and Master of Laws (LL.M.) courses.

The petition particularly challenged the rationale for the existing 5-year integrated BA.LL.B. and BBA.LL.B. courses. It argues that the duration is disproportionate to the law-related curriculum and places an excessive financial and time burden on students.

"New Education Policy 2020 promotes 04 years Graduation Courses in all Professional and Academic Courses but BCI has not taken appropriate steps to review the existing Syllabus, Curriculum and the Duration of the LLB and LLM Courses," submitted the petition.

According to the plea, the 5-year integrated courses require students to study subjects such as History, Sociology, Economics and Political Science alongside core law subjects. It argues that a 4-year standalone law degree would be sufficient and would be more consistent with the objectives of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.

"The purpose of any course is to provide just and essential knowledge required for career and not to barrage a student with all kinds of knowledge as they are innumerable. In no way is BA essential to study B.Law. It is good if Student know it, but it is entirely superfluous," argued the plea.

It cited the UGC’s decision allowing students with 4-year undergraduate degrees to directly appear for NET and pursue PhD programmes.

The petition also sought consideration of issues including the financial burden of legal education on economically weaker students, the amount of time spent on non-law subjects and internships, and whether the existing 5-year course is necessary to impart adequate legal education.

"The 05 years B.Law has been designed for extracting money and the most egregious part is that such dirty trick is being used in the name of education," said the plea.

During Tuesday's hearing, Upadhyay pointed out that neither the Centre, the Bar Council of India nor the Law Commission of India had filed their replies in the matter.

Since the case could not be taken up, he sought that it be listed on Friday.

[Read Live Coverage]