| RUNOIABAR, New Delhi Tel, ayo) t4aee Seu Emnal | Hoe barcomcictnvo.om Penh aoza Fr Website : win barcounsteain org a w Pf > ada fates: uo AR “ vet SAK COUNCIL OF INDIA (Statutory Body Constituted under the Advos: ‘Act, 1964) ote Bae yey nea € di sigan’ vita 1 ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY 1 ae Avr aia ‘Joint Secretary Nay D One BOI D: 14/2015 (1.8) Date: 12.01.201 The Vice-Chancellor, Campus Law Gen ze (CEC), University of Delhi, Chhatra Mary, Dethi -7 | } Subir Regartiny show cause notice issued to Une F in Doth University, Detht < t Sir, j ‘The Bar Cou oP iitdia at its meeting neld on 2! y considers the anspection report of the above mentioned col Fea Sra TAN Chater abate Follows The Bas Cannell OF indie. conaliered: tie inp ceccios coy he GRspeetinn team, The Counelt appreciates the et iiation tll dhe session 2014-30 15a lowaven liow caise notice be sent to View Chanelion at Us j Deans’ wad (ieee Profeasore Tnehargerof ail the three (GEnktes Universtiy, to reply sili. eight eles to) the adverse reper Inspection team After receipt of the sone, the matier be put consideration, All the adverse reports be attached 19 the ench o! hy { notice itself ‘This is for your information and necessary action. at gentile, pus Law Conbre-t, Faculty of Luv, University of Delhi ‘Chhatra Marg, Beth of Three Departments fan Centres, Catmpus Law Contre (CLC), Faculty of Law, University oF Delhi, Chhates Mary, DelhiyEnd Dean, Campus Law Contre (CLC), University of Detti, Chhatra Marg, Dell Prof, Incharge Campus Law Centred Faculty of Law, University of Delhi Chhatra Marg, Dethi-7 Prof. Incharge, Law Centre-Il, Faculty of Lav, ARS D. College Building, Dhaula Kuan, Delhi ~ 21 Seoratary, Bar Council af Delhi 2/6, Sivifort Institutional Area, Khel Gaon Mary, Delhi - 110 049 The Director, Directorate of Higher Education Govt. of Delhi, 4B” Wing, 5 sham Nath Marg, Govt, of HCT of Delhi, Delhi Ps abe; : 20 — page (4 : INSPECTION REPORT + OF ; CAMPUS LAW CENTRE (Originally known as “Morning, Classes of Faculty of Law”) seh Camptis Law Centre, Faculty of Law, Chhatra Marg, Delhi Date of inspection - 1440,2014 Bar Council of India in order to ensure uniform standard and quality of Tegal education throughout the country, aftér due: deliberations and consultations with various universities adopted the Rules on Standards of Legal Education and Recognition of Degrees in Law, for the purpose of enrolment as Advocates as well as regarding inspection of the Universitit, imparting the legal education, for recognising the degrees they are awarding, ‘These rules are known as “Rulés of Legal Education 2008" hereinafter referred to as rules and are framed u/s 7(1) (h) & (i), 24(@Gii) and (iiia), 49(1)(af),(ag), and (dl) of the Advocates Act, 1961. The Centre of Legal Education has been defined under these rules as under = (iv) “Centers of Legal Education” » s, Colleges of (a) All approved Departments of Law of | Lavo, Consiiiuent Colleges under recognise affiliated College Hiools of law of recognis approved. Iniversities 59 Provided that a Department of College or Institution conducting correspondence courses through distance edweation shall not included. (b) National law Universities constituted and established by statutes of the Union or States and mandated to staré and pun Law ‘courses. i ‘The University Of Delhi falls in Clause (a) which is running Three Law Centres, Two Centres are located in the University campus while the 31 one jg in rented building in a Delhi University college “ARSD College, Dhaula Kuan’ which is an Evening College imparting Legal Edheati from 6.15 pm to 9. , | Bar Council of India, from its record found, that all the Three Centres had never’ been inspected so far Chairman BCI received oral/written complaiis from the students that all is not well at those Centres: Sturtents~ le HoE want their identity to be disclosed for fear of being victimized, BCL issued notice regarding de-recognition of the degrees, to all the universities f who had not got inspections clone, | ‘The University of Delhi thereafter applied to the Bar Council of india én 8.102014 for inspection of all the Three Centers of Legal Education atid~~ ‘ —18— page 12 deposited the inspection fee as required under rules University also requested for extension of approval of affiliation and regularizing the Admissions made in academic year 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and 2014-2015. It is on this request that inspection team consisting of the following was constituted and date of inspection was fixed for 44.10.2014 and 15.10.2014. ' Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. S. Dave Prof. (Dr.) Ranbir Singh, Former Judge, Vice-Chancellor, High Court of Rajasthan National Law University, Dwarka * Jaipur, Rajasthan Delhi Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwat, Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, 9, Senior Advocate, Director § Chairman, Indian Law Institute, Delhi Bar Council of India ‘Mr. Manan Kumar Mishia, Mr. K. K. Manan, Advocate ' Senior Advocate Chairman, Bar Council of Delhi Membr & Ex-Chairman, New Delhi : Bar Council of India | Mr. Bhoj Chander Thakur, , Advocate Member, Bar Council of India am airived at the Campus Law Centre at 9,00 an as scheduled. Deaf Sh. Ashiwani Compulvory Subjects: () LB-101 : Blements of Indian Legal System (Growth df Constitutional Governmenttand Rule of 4 . Law with special reference to India) » (ii) LB-102 : Principles of Contract (General Principles) ‘ . (iii) LB-103 = Law of Tors (Nature, General Principles, General Defenses and Specific Torts) ’ , : (iv) LB+104 : Criminal Law- 1 (Specific Crimes) (W) EB105 : Family Law-l (Hindu Law’ of Marriage, Adoption & Maintenance, Minority and My Guardianship, Muslim Law of Marriage, Divorce . and Dower & Acknowledgement ‘of Paternity, Wakfs and Endowments) ) LL.B. Term Examination:HQhem * Page |10 > Compulsory Subjects: (1) LB-201 : Law of Evidence (i) LB-208 ; Femily Law-l (Hindu Law-of Joint Family, Partition, Gifts and “Wills, Muslim Law ofGif's & Wills, Hindi: Succession Act ancl Gencral Principlos of Inheritance underMuslim Law) (ii)LB-203 + Criminal Law-1I (General Principles and Criminal Procedure) (iv) LB-204 : Property Law ' (9) 1B-205 : Public International Law-I (Law of Peace) p : LL.B. IH Term Exami » Compulsory Subjecis: () LB-301 : Constitutional Law-1 (Distribution of powers between the Union and States, Freedom of, commerce and intercourse, Union and State executive, Parliament’ and StateLegislatures, Judiciary and Emergency) jon: ation (i) LB-302 : Limitation and Arbi > Optional Subjects: (Opt any three of the following) () LB-3031 : BusinessAssociation-T (Partnership fandAgency) (i) LB-3032 : Labour Law-I Unions Act, Indus Disputes Act exchiding principles of industrial ion relating to procedure for taking inary action and principles of fixation of \wages including various allowances and retirement | and other benefits foremployees) | Gii) LB-3033 : Taxation-I (Income Tax) (jv) LB-3034 : Private International Law (9) LB-3035 : Law of Carriage (vi) LB-3036 : Public International Law-Il (eitlement of "Dispites and “Intemational HumanitarianLaw). 1 > LL.B. 1V Term Examinatio > Compulsory Subjects: (@ LB-401 ; Constitutional Law-ll Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties, Directive Printiplesof Siate Policy, Civil Servants, Amendment vf the Constitution) =” (i)LB-402 : Administrative Lav » Optional Subjects: (Oph any tree ofthe following) (i) LB-4031: Business Association-I1 (Company Law) (i) LB-4032 + Labour Low-I (Phe Induststal Disputes Act provisions not included in ‘Labour sthe Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)Page [41 = Payment of Bonus Act, theMinimumy ¢ Workmenié™s Compensation Act mM Statelnsurance Act and the [Act th Wages Act, th the Employeesi€ Factories Act) (ii) LB-4035. + Taxation-II (The, Wealth Tox and provisions of the Income Tex Act mot covered inTaxation-I) (i) 034 ; Law and Poverty (An examination of the relationship between law, and the status ofpoverty; Examples of legal problems of the poor would be studied with reference to legislative atiempts to alleviate the condition of poverty, methods of legal redress ingovernmental xiministeation and administration of justice. A tere focus of the course would be on problems faced by the poor as litigants and as consumers) (y) LB-4035 : Commercial Transactions (Sale of Goods; Consumer Protection). . (vi) LB-4036 : Criminology. (vii) LB-4037 : Gender Justice (viii) LB-4038 : Intellectual Property Law - 1 (General Principles, Enforcement and Abuse of TPRgJIntemational Corjventions, - Law _of Marks, D Names, Geographicalindications and | 1B.5031 ; Military Law? yerningArmed Forees in India) G)LB-5032 ii) LB-5033 ; Rent Control and Slum Clearance) (iy) LB-5034 : Intellectual Pi (Copyright and Neighbouring Rig! Patents, Law. of Plant Varieties and Tights, ‘Traditional Confidentiallnformation and Integrated Ci (¥) LB-5035 : Internationa! Institutions (vi) LB-5036: International Law (vii) LB-5037 : Environmental Law. > LL.B. VI Term Examination: + Compulsory Subjects: (@ LB-601 : Professional Ethics, | Conveyancing and Moot CourtsPage 113 ee NG te ae LLB,LLM,& |. Professor PHD. 25 Years_|_1,47,406/- : LUB,LLM,& |. We i Professor PHD. 25 Years_| /1,56176/- Associate ; Professor | LL.B. LL.M 36 Years | 1,52611/- Associate Professor 29 Years_|_1,41,709/- Bri Associate : DsRaman Mittal | Professor | MSS.&PH.D. | 15 Years 1,30,186/- ee Associate | LLB, LLM, & Professor PH.D. 20 Years_|_1,26,575/- ‘Associate | LL.B, LLM, & ‘Dr. Gunjan Gupta _| Professor PH.D. 18 Years_| \1,23,056/- Associate ; Professor LLB, LLM. 04 Years_| _ 67,057/- AD-HOC FACULTY MEMBERS LIST ! : Designatio Experienc ] Gross Namie of.the Staff A Qualification e. Salary "4 v ‘Asstt. . ‘Mr. Lalit Mohan Professor . 1 (Adhoc) LLB, LLM. 35 Years |» 56,080/- | Asstt. y Professor LLB, LLM& “ : j . Ms. HarleenKaur (Adhoc) Pursiiing Ph.D__|_06 Years _| 4 56,080/- Asstt. . Professor LLB, LLM, & _ (Adhoe) PH.D. 07 Years | 56,080/- Asstt. : Professor : Mr, Santésh Kamar (Adhoc) LLB. LL.M. 05 Years 56,080/= Asstt. . Professor LL.B, LLM & ie Dr.SanjiviniRaina | _(Adhoc)_| PursuingPhD | 11. Years | —56080/- Asstt . { Ms., . Professor | LLB, LLM & SS NamitaVashistha _(Adhoo)_|_Parsuing Ph.D _|_05 Years | _56,080/-" ° Asstt. 2 LLB,LLM | 10Years | $6,080/- 41 Years | 56,080/- Ol Year | _56,080/- 04 Yearsz page 114 eA ee fi 4 : 7 Teal F “T (Adhoc) Asstt. Professor | LLB, LLMé& Pursuit 56,080/- © [a3 | Ms, Anjusinha (aahoe) Parsuing. Ph.D | _06 Years 0 sett. . + (Be Professor LLB, LLM, 14 _|VendanaMahalwar_| (Adhoc) | _ &Ph.D Gs Nears eo UE ‘ i Assit. s f Professor : 15 _| Mr. Rajiv Kamboj (Adhoc) | LLB,LLM. | 08 Years | _56,080/- Assit. | Mr Professor ae ‘ 16 _| InderjeetSantoshi (Adhoe) LLB. LLM: 01 Year. 56,080/- 5 i Professor , 17 "| Mr, Rohini Kumar (Auhoc) LL.B., LL.M. 01 Year 56,080/- Asstt, : Mandeep Professor ie |_18 (Adhoc) LLB, LL.M. Ot Year | 56,080/- { ‘Asstt. ; re | Professor | 19__| Mx Jamshed Khan | (Adhoc) LLB, LLM. | 03 Years’ | 56,080/- ene | Asstt. : _. | Professor | LL.B, LL.M & | a 20 | Mr. Maotoshi AO! | (Adhos) | PursuingPhD | OLYeax | 56080/- | . " Asstt. 5 aaa oe |) | LLB, 0 = 21 __|;Ds, Shashil a = aaa 1, tM X = pte) ea 24_| Mr, Dinesh. LB, LLM. ar a u 25_|Ms, Rahul Kumar__|_(Adh LL.B, LLM. | : Asstt, j 1 '| Professor 26_| Mr. MayanleMittal | (Adhoc) | LLB, LLM. | 01 Year ra “Asstt. ; : 1 | Professor 2 27__||.Ms, Preeti6ehrawat'-|_(Adhoc) | _L.L.By LL.M. | 03 Months f "| Asstt . a | Mr, SourieAnand | Professor | 7 28 [Singh ~ (Adhor) | LLBsULM. | 2Years_ | ¢ LIST OF GUEST FACULTY am : ap P : : ULE, 1_| Me. Neeraj Kumar Guest Faculty LLM. E jEe CS ‘ : Page [15 Rs, 1000 Per Lecture Mave eens) “LLB, | 1Year | (Paid Maximum 2_| Sanghi __|_ Guest Faculty LLM. es 25000), Rs, 1000 Per | LLB, Lecture LLM, (Paid Maximum * 3 | Dr AmanHingorani | Guest Faculty | &PhD | 10 Years 25000) ; e Bs 1000 Per 5 | ; Lecture . LLB, 03 (Paid Maximum 4_| Ms, NiharikaBahl GuestFaculty | LL.M. | Months |___25000) | “The aforesaid list Of faculty’ indicate that faculty is not in‘ accordance with the Fequirements of the law. We were informed that ever since 2005 there had been no regular appointments of law teachers. But this also according to us does riot appears to be comect situation since the list of regular teaché:s had an experience of 18 ypars while at No.l Mrs. Neha shown as Assistant Professor is working last only. 4 years with a fixed salary of Rs.67,057/-, We had an interaction with the members of the facully and put several question§ to thm about their mode of appointments, conditions of services, ete. It was shocking that yegtlar appointments are not being done and the Faculty Members have to face intecview with imregular dates and therefore salary has also not being paid in the time, Many of the members of the staff complaint that despite the fact that Diwali is on the hhead but they have not recsived salary for last 4 to 6 months, ; The Dean of the Faculty when confronted with this situation stated thatiit is because pF the Ad-hoc appointments that every time after vacation the sanction to be to obtain. from the Head Office hence it takes time to obtain the sanction. In the considerpd opinion of the team this is no excuse. Firstly, the appointment should be made im accorclance with the Clause 17 of Schedule III of the Legal Education Rules 2008 which teads as under “Rule 17 with regard to Core Faculty ere shell be sufficient number of full time faculty members in each Centre of Legal Education ( i. Department, constituent or uffiliated college ) to teach each subject at all point of time for running courses’ who cart be supported by part time or visiting facully. Such a core faculty shall in no case be less than six in the first year of the approval with both streams in operation, eight in the second year and ten in the case of third year of law courses. In addition, for the integrated * course there shall be adequate faculty in the subjects offered in the liberal eftucational subjects as part of the course by the institution, These faculties in the liberal edweational discipline in Arts, Science, Management, Commerce? Engineering, Technology or any * other discipline shall possess qualification as is required under’ the UGC guideline cr under such other sidndard setting body as the discipline is allotted to by arly Act, statute, or Rules of the Government of India or of a State. fi For the Three Year Backelor of Law degree course only with two sections without + the Honour program, there sill be minitnuim of 4 core fucully in the first year six in the ‘second and eight in the third year in addition fo the Principal/Hlead or Dean as the case may be, ; i Provided that an institution intending to run any specialized or honours course must have at Teast three faculties in the group in which specialization and honours courses areoffered. : Proided further that eal fulltime faculty shail take as mony classes in the subject or subjects as my be assigned to then on the basis of standard prescribed by ‘te standard sétting institution’ like UGC, 3sc = 26- ition of a University, which was already affiliated cour: ither scheme or both by the: ‘and approved to run professional courses of et 0 i q Ene he inspection of the University, falls short of required full time ily, the new qdimission in courses may be required to remain suspended until new fs numberof faculty is procured. The University shall before starting a new endemic session, notify which institutions are only be allowed to admit fresh students, | Provided further, if any insti Provided furtier that if while inspecting the University itoas found that in any institution of the University adequate number of full time faculty was not there in the staff, the Bar Council after giving notice to the University might give a public notice directing the University not to admit students in the new academic year jn that institution. “ The list of the faculty members along with their profile and photographs have been supplied by the Campus Law Centre and the same placed on the record...” Library Details " i ; 2 e \ ! i The Committee inspected the Library and found that there was sufficient number of books available in the library, bat the details could not be provided of the satisfadtion 4 of the team. However, the inspection team is of the opinion that the librasy is good in so far as the number of text books and law journals, etc is concerned Total Staff Strength of Law Faculty Library = | 435 L No, of Post ‘Teaching Staff j = a eS: Assistant Librarian OF =NiL= Non Teaching Professional Aj ‘Library Attendant SafaiKaramchari Z = Total Ms. Aruna Garg, MA, M. Lib, LLB, M. Phil (Library Science), The libraty is fairly good but it require tender care as dust+was lying on books and despite old ACs installed have were not proper working condil Thete is lack of proper light in the library. The chairs are broken, very number of reading facility. Books are not properly managed. “Indi i Review” not subscribed since 2005. They have also nat purchased the books on “Selected Judgements on Professional Ethics”. ; ere are {5 computers for Evlibrary and most of them are of very old models. This libraxy is also.uséd by the students of Law Centre-L as such by 4000 students which in the opinion of the Committee is wholly in adequate. As sich the sitting . J capacity isionly of 50 students, Wi-Fi facility also not in an area. There are NO F drinking facilities near the library; there is no cafeteria where students can fake food. The library was found to quite congested, on enquiry from the students sitting in the library complaint that students from other law colleges also come to: the’fbrary jand used tt with the result law stucients have to wait before they get‘ : 2255 Page |17 any seat in the library. This present library is also being used by the students of Taw Centre =I, Law Centre -If. The total strength of students who are entitled to use this library is mote than 4000. In other words Campus Law Centre does not exclusive tse’ of this library but Wi-Fi facilities are not being given to the students, The sitting arrangements in the library are also not good, keeping the strength of the students using the library. i In our considered opinion either a separate new library building be constructed as this library is to be Centralised library for all the law’ centers run by the Department of Law and must cater for at least 5000 to 6000 stucients which is even total stréngth of faculty of law of the University. The students working in the library made grievance though several students, ‘were not the students of the law Centres they too come early and occupy the ‘seats who prepare themselves for competitive examination and many a time chaits are not for the students of law faculty 1 . The Librarian must ensure that non entrants the ‘library without permission rather entry should be through ID cards. \ 9 PREVIOUS COMPLIANCE/INADEQUA AILS ‘The infrastructure of the centre of legal education respecting class rooms' is wholly inadequate. We were told that these class rooms are shared by the Law Centre -I and Law Centre | also hold their law classes in these very rooms from 11,00 to 6.00 pm. The classes are being taken from,8.30 am to 3.30 pm. *Rule SA. Sizé.of a section: The Inspection Committee may approve for admission in each of the section ofa class for riot more than 60 students and ray allow a raintimume of. ‘ve sections iv one class (such as First Year case may be unless there is any exce ions in each class but not n ‘cond Year or Third Year, ele) as t reason. for granting more sections in a Class, suck a reason has to be specified by the ction Committee. , any or It is observed .by the Inspection Committee that Campus Law: Centre haé admitted students in each of the section of a class for more than 60 students, The Aw Centre has admitted 806 in the first year, 633 in the second year Campus L ‘ tal number of students {s 2048..As per and 609 students in the third year the to! 1 above rule the total number of strength of the students cannot exceed 300 « Seadents in total, Whereas Campus Law Centre has violated the above rule by giving adntission more thah as stipulated in the above rule. There is a clear violation of the rule. z a Students faced lot of inconvenience because their time is wasted. It is also come of expanding the premises of Campus: Law Centre to our knowledge that instea is: the Law Centzel which was previously located and rin at Mandir Marg, New Delhi has also been housed in the same campus on temporary arrangements and the burden has gome on the Campus ‘Law Centre. We also came to know from, the tecords that Law Centre I isa also using the class rooms .for its 6.15 to 9.15 pm shift, The Campus Law Centre needs to have more class rooms, Modt Court Room, Placement Room, Big Lega! Aid Room, Boys Common room, Girls, ‘Common Room, office room for the staff and teaching faculty. ee z emule 4, Avademic Building: There shall be the academic building: to provide separate class rooms for general class for each section sufficient to accommodate uwp wage Page [i requirement of per student floor space as specified by sity Si a ee sion or such other standard setting boty Uke ie ee uch other rooms for tutorial work, moot court room exercises, oe sate male and female students and adequate iibrary space for sor poke, periodienls, and journals, The ibrary shall also have adequate rosling space for at least 25% of the enrolled students according t0 per eapita reading space specified by any standard setting bodies like UGC. ‘There is no. separate! academic building is provided to conduct separate dlass rooms for general class for each section, although sixty students as per section can Accommodate in the class rooms. The University ; It is observed that classes are conducted between 830 am. to 230 pm in Campus Law Centre for imparting Legal Education. ‘ Asiper thg legal Education Rules - 2008 the following rules have not been compiled by the Campus Law Centre. fa z 4 lea ) “Regular Course of Study” means and incluiles a course whieh runs for at ¢ hours a day continuously with an additional half an hourrecess every dey and runing not tess than thirty hours ofworking schestule per week,” “Rule 5. General timing for conduction of courses in Acailemi¢ Building: Classes nity he couucted between 8 a.m, to 7 pan in on Centre of Legal Education, which is not fully residential. However the Library may reniain open till 10 pm, As per Rule 24 with regard to Moot court exercise and Internship: This paper may have three components of 30 marks each marks. * alt i Students may be required to attend two trials in the cours or three years of LL.B. studies. They will maintain a record various steps observed during their attendance on differ court assignment. This scheme will carry 30 marks. (©) Interviewing techniques and Pre-trial preparations and Ip 5 diary (30 marks): Each student will observe two interviewing sessions of chents at the Lawyer's Office/Legal Aid Office and record the proceedi tin a diary, which will carry 15 marks. Each student will further observe the preparation of documents and court papers by the Advocate and the x Procedure for the filing of the suit/petition. This will be recorded tu the diary, which will carry 15 marks, (@The fourth component of this paper will be Viva Voce examination on all the above three aspects, This will carry 10ymurks, The University has not following the above mentioned rule with respect to holding of moot court regularly. There is no provision for the intemship for the students imparting legal education in the campus law centre, The University has failed to follow the above said rule. ,= pe Nae Page 119 7} ie library of Campus Law Centre has not adequate reading space for at least be Of the enrolled students. The University has also violated the following les: 1, Ride 6; Library Building: There shall be adequate space in the library for * computer facility with access to internet and ational and international library access and data bases, During the course of inspection we do not found any facilities for indoor and outdoor facilities for games and sports, Rule 7 with regard to Games Facilities: There shall be facilities for indoor mud outdoor facilities for games and sports. The University has also violated the following rules :- The University: has failed to provide the halls of residence seperately for males and females, a “Rule 8 Halls of residence: There may be facility required for halls of residlence separately for males and females students constricted on the Girection and specification by UGC or any such other standard setting body for affiliating an Institution, ‘ 2 * The Legal Aid Centre being run by the Department is housed in a very small cabin haying one table and two chairs only, THe Legal Aid Centre is not running as per the above rule, ; j “Rule 11. Legal Aid Center: Each institution shall establish and run a Légal Aid Clinie under the supervision of a Senior Faculty Member twlto may adyninister the Clinic run by the Final year students of the Institution in cooperation with the Legal Aid Authorities with list of voluntary lawyers and other Non- Government Organizations engaged in this regard in the locality generally from which the'student community of the Institution, hail from. | OBSERVATION: We are members of the team are of the view that the Vice-Chancellor of the University. | | and competent atithority has been kept in dark completely otherwise the conditions of | | the University should be deteriorated. It is the sole responsibility of the Dean of the Faculty of Law to put a correct picture before the aythority. . ‘ Since 1963 onwards neither infrastructure has been improved nor have ay other facilities been provided to the students. But number of intake has been increased near about 6000‘in total in all the 3 centers (Evening Morning). Even the 2048 students cannot stand in 10 rooms, the question of sitting in the class rooms does not arise, On account ofthe negligence on the part of the Dean the students are forced to stand in the ground for their turn to next class, This present situation responsible for tarnishing the image of this premier University. : 4 We the team recommend suitable steps be taken immediately to iinprove the standard of the legal education and to'restore the reputation of the University by providing the “infrastructure such as class raoms, suificient number of regular permanent faculty, | gq. library, moot court facility and other facility so that the atmosphere of study is to be developed in the University. i } RECOMMENDATION 2 i ; 7 : Should be closed down byt s 1c of the firm view that the Campus Law Centre s| : own byt seeing Be Sea of the students as well as reputation of the University, a lenient view may be jel HLO-— ecommend that admii a a taken by the Legal Eduication Committee and re! ssion | academic year 2011-12, 2012-2013 a d 2013-2014 may be reg! arized in terms of the i c ( posing penalty of Rs.1,50,000/- t i jan Committee: ple Justice Kurian _ Ee ee aa va conditional temporary approval oF affiiatfon, r faulting academic year) n Ov a Dera 2015 subject to fulfillment of the following conditions: x aon " adequate number of teaching faculty on 1. The Campus Law Centre must appoint : ; m ittee by the University before starting regular basis through proper selection commit i next academic session 2015-2016. It is made clear that the intake of students from the academic year 2015-2015 will necessarily depend upon appointment of the adequate faculties as well as improved. infrastructure. 2. ‘The university should provide wi-fi facilities to the students and the faculties. The Jincharge of the library must ensure that access/entry in the library should be through proper ID cards. The number of computers must be increased in the library. 4 , 3. It is expected that the Library of the University would subsertbe to the latest software available in law along with all reputed journals from best of law schools in’ India andabroad to facilitate the teaching and research at faculty oflaw. . | 4. The syllabiis of the University should be in consonance with the CDC report of the Bar Council of India, They should include clinical paper such as, Moot Court and Professional Ethics papers which is at present not there, 3 g 5. The Campus Law Centre must follow the ti met aC eC ntioned in the rt run the law classes for 5 % hours continuously with half an " am to 7.00 pm in between they should run the se ‘ 8, ‘The adequate reading space with cubic facilities should be pro 9. The University mu je adequate space for the Girls Goi Common }rogms with all required infrastructure such as suffic number of chairs, table, etc. A Pei = 10:The class room's condition must be improved by providing go providing sufficient number of fans, the floor and roof should cd painted, The furniture of class rooms such as chairs, table, podium, black board should be replaced with new one, 11Tollet facilities for boys and girls required immediate renovation which is at present ina very shabby condition. ii 42.The Seminar Hall and the Auditorium (which is presently used asia class rooms) should be renovated/furnished having mike and overhead projector system, " Jass rooms and other facilities which is being used in the evening by aw Centre -1 should not be used by them. a ‘and they should be cae so that: ignitaries visit the ey il should be impressive. ' 18. The onipluance of the above conditions should be filed o the Dean/Professor Ipchatge of Campus Law Centre of the University by way of affidavit and it is further directed the Campus Law Centre -Il|_. should admit the students from the academic year 2015-2016 subject to ‘ comipl he above conditions. University mustapply for further le . extension of aj TOV: of affili tion well in time giving, the details of the | 5 |__ compliance r The 7 taken at the time of inspection are annexed with this report _ Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. S. Dave Former jitdge, os Sie cellor, mg, . High Court of Rajasthan | Naffonal Law University, Dwarka ee eee : Delhi Core} Voor es ; (Sos . Mr. Manoj KumarSinha, “ae Baer dvocate, Director « Chairman, Indian Law Institute, Delhi, Bar Council of India as : \ Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Mr. KK Manan, Advocate |)" Chairman, Bar Council of Dehi New Delhi 5 ;Photographs of Cz Dated 14.‘amputs Law CentreLibrary Cainpus Law Centre (Hon'ble Chairman of the Bar Couneil of India Mr. Biri Singh Sinsinwar pointing out the dusi on the Books! . LibrarLibrary Campus Law.Centre of the Inspection Team of the Bar Council of India Verifying the periodicals in the Library)Library Can {Glontble Chairman of e Bar Council of hadi F Mr. Biri Singh Sinsin ing out th Revy Cam Jembers of the B: d pointing out that the comput ampus Law Centre in which classe: the chairs are damaged ‘ aaa S.are going on‘and most'ofonium of Campus Law Centre in which classes ara gains the cl i itorium of Campus Law‘suidifotiom oF Gampus Law Centre in which classes are going on and most of ; the chairs are damagedeckers of Gitls Common Roo:ey Haroaped Sofa in Girls Common Room Campus Law Centre and sitting i ! capacity!” fe: 280 HEin order to ensure uniform standard and cae ; uughout the country, after due deliberations and vatious universities adopted the Rules on al Education and Recognition of Degrees in Law, for pose, of enrolment as Advocates as well as Rees the: Universities, . imparting the legal education, degrees they are awarding. These rules are known as € Legal Education 2008” hereinafler referred to .as rules and u/s 7(1) (h) & (i), 24(1) (ii) and (iia), 49)(28),(ag), and * - Advocates Act, 1961. The Gente of Legal Borraeo) has < 2 ‘{iv) “Centers of Legal Education” (@) All approved Departments eG 4 () ear ial ‘land Univers statutes of the Union or States and mandated to start and run Lah courses.Pog ead ip: applied to the Bar: Council of India on, ce Centers of Legal Education and. e as required under rules. University also: ‘of approval of affiliation and yegularizing the lemic year 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014 and request that inspection team consisting of the tah date of inspection was fixed for 14.10.2014 Prof. (Dx) Ranbir Singh, | ‘ Vice-Chancellor, Ps National Law University, Dwarka Delhi, i © Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Director ‘ Indian Law Institute, Delhi, Mr. KK, Manan, Advocate Chairman, Bar Council of Delhi ‘Membr & Ex-Chairman, New Delhi |, ‘Bar Council of India Mr. Bhoj Chander Thakur, Advocate . Member, Bar Council of India The team arviyed af the Law Centze at 9.00 amas scheduled. Dean faculty of law and professor in charge of Law Centre- II Sh. Ashiwani Kurhac Bansal and Prof, Gupta, Professor In-Charge Campus Law Centre -I1,, Prof. Usha Tandon Professor In-Charge Campus Law Centre received the team: the team was.accompanied with Secretary Bar Council of India Sh. J. R, ‘Shatma and other members of the staff. A photographer for video-graphy yas also taken together by the inspection team. ‘The details of the* e annexed with,this introductory note which is common n ind Ss Unive wan= Poe “page [a : yoni a Migewen er Justice Rohingtan Nariman, Judge Supreme Court of Indie are Ae ‘s this University. : J : 1 In 1963 the present building of CLC was constructed in ie ues strength of students in faculty of law was 250. ao cater to the aos eee strength building with.a healthy environment around was conetractey Be it had just the sufficient accommodation for the strength at that point’ of time. The number of the students started swelling and the university had to stablish two more ceritre in quick succession one in 1970 and another in without any infrastructure and sufficient fculty, p 1 ' ' The Law Center I was started in the Campus of Campus Law Center at the cost of airy) healthy and spacious nice environment in an around it’but,the premises started becoming cramped. Even tin shed structures started coming up in premises and gradually a building which was consttucted for CLC is now bearing the load of about 4000 students in the same campus almost with the same capacity except few more rooms on the para pherry of the earlier, premises and the situation can better be visualized and ~ imagine then eXpressed as to how suffocating the entire premises. f itis extremely regrettable that absol for de i i one of the senior most law lords in England between Germany and:England was that in Germ But in England the Judge is God. In India too, have to give much better status and recognition to our initially move the hearts and mould the minds of law étuc is: It is lay stucents who become practising lawyers, and itis the bright ones, amongst them that become judges. ; One most serious aspect facing the legal profession ie) Mal the legal education system appears to have lost its ethical eantent The education of a practising lawy: Der) naver increases, Tt continues throughout his career, and 1 would suggest that the malfonal bar associations adopt a three poin f First, the urgent need to re-discoy and reaffirm the profession's moral foundation (that will help refurbish mage), Second, to inetilcate ethi do remember people lear: 1 principles in the minds of young lawyers (and st by example, not by precepis—* «: ‘s BGT neta ae Ta Third, to promote morally responsible and responsive lawyering, pr as they say, make lawyers good. fica : Areading of the inspection notes would show that itis just otherwise inthe Delhi University at all three Law Centers run by the Delhi University: conilitions of the teachers are miserable in the main Center and LC-I wholly inadequate teachers room cubicles are not even of bathroom size and absolutely, no facility for having cup of tea during a relaxing period. More than 60% teachers appointed in all thrée centers are on adhoc_basis.' Get their salaries after interview hence they have insecurity of jobs sword ' Damoeles. As always hanging on their neck and therefore with irregular appointment on contractual salaries. It is impOssible’to conceive of that the, ‘Wishes of Mr. Pali 3. Nariman can be achieved at all the three centers. The Members of the inspection team individually and collectively , had’ , interacted with several members of the staff, and the students besides visiting the class rooms and every cornet of the premisés. Details afe not only available on the performa of the inspection note but for the sake of Verification of the Report, the committee has taleen extra care for video- ~ Btaphy-and photography of every rhinute detail. Some of them are annexed hereto and the, details can algo be asked for office of the Bar Council of India. A look’ of this videg-graphy and photography would shock the Conscious Of anyone who see.it and cherish the idea of quality legal education. Committee also felt during inspection that many teachers could not come,’ out with their grievances as they might be afraid of being dictiinized or" thrown out of job being on ad-hoc basis : The members of the Comm know’ by their own expériences that imparting education in law is for making responsible citizen and there should have sproper academic courses besides cultural activity, spars, , mock courts,.moot courts, interactive session, seminar, symposium and workshop, etc. E It is surprising that faculty of law who is imparting edlucation to the stutlents who are going to be the custodian of law and order of the country are ‘not giver! the facilities of developing their personality. by having sufficient number of moot courts and the students working as internees and imparting training in various studies of para law courses Itis expected of a student before he becomes a lawyer to develop a skill fort axticulated presentation of the case thorough study of the matter as he has to be taught how to marshal the facts of the case. In words of Denial Webster “A lawyers business is to refine, defihe, split haits, look into authorities and conipare cases - A mari cari never gallop Over the fields of law on Pegasis, nor fly across them on the wing of oratory = lf he wort stand on terra-firma,.he must descend - If he would be a great lawyer, he must first consent to become a great drudge, it is in thie epribiihat ae education in faculty of law is to be imparted. ; f 5 ‘ agesa -S6- a “pee The committee had been informed that the University authorities are likely ‘ to shift the campus Centre II also in theses very premises as inspection report ‘of Centre would show the number of students at present is 1389 with 9 sections in first year, 6 in second year and 5 in 3 year. We are afraid. though the building shown where jt is to be located ip future would hopelessly in adequate. In fact the present premises namely ARSD College building the infrastructure is far more superior than the combined one of | campus law centre and law centre- I. Except that it has no place for proper library and the reason is oblivious that the Cenire is handicap because it hag no independent building of its own. Centre Il is also’ likely to be shifted in these very premises and he showed . the place also that auditorium, the building is likely to be converted in Law Centre -ILas stated above and at the cost of repitation a premises which was originally meant for accommodating; 250 students would then carry a’ load of more than 5000 students and numbers The Dean of the Faculty of Law as stated ‘above has mentioned 'that Law Tt was surprising there were sizable dun support the Dean’s office and efficiency whiel own report which that submitted at the ti loudly supporting the actions of the Dean be field of administration and it was the same 6 present at the time of inspection of all the three centres. Th there was lan attempt that there should not fait ins) ection and tou! versioi of the’chidants should ee aaa grasper ens similar was.the approach of some of the ad-hoc teachers, Th fact the ites | had twice request the Dean to leave the Committee alone while interacting with the staff. and:the students individually and collectively and it was theréafter gnly whatever has bee; mentioned above regarding non- payrent of'salary and repeated! hatassment at the time of interview would come to surface. ‘ Teis pertinent to note that the present facilities in the library is inadequate seeing the nuiiibe: of stuclents and the faculty, Since the Faculty of Law is & premier institution, it is expected that the Library of the University would subscribe to the Jatest software available in law along with all reputed journals from! best of law schools in India and abroad to facilitate ‘the teaching and research at faculty of law. ei