The Supreme Court has issued notice on a PIL seeking formation of a Legal Education Commission to review the LLB and LLM course duration, fee structure, and curriculum, citing concerns over accessibility and affordability for students.
The Supreme Court issued a notice regarding a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that calls for the establishment of a Legal Education Commission to evaluate the curriculum and duration of Bachelor of Laws (LL.B) and Master of Laws (LL.M) programs in India.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi has requested responses from the Central government, the Bar Council of India (BCI), the University Grants Commission (UGC), and the Law Commission of India.
This matter is scheduled for hearing on September 9.
The PIL, filed by Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, argues that while the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 encourages four-year graduation programs across various fields, the BCI has yet to take steps to revise LL.B and LL.M courses.
The petition urges the Court to direct the Centre to form a Legal Education Commission or an expert committee made up of distinguished educationists, jurists, retired judges, advocates, and professors to assess the syllabus, curriculum, and duration of law courses.
Upadhyay contends that the extended five-year law program seems primarily designed for financial gain.
He states,
“The unreasonable 5 years B. Law Course has been set under the pressure of private college management so as to make the most amount of money they could from the course. The Course fee of Private Law Colleges and even the National Law Universities is exorbitant and lower as well as middle class students find it very difficult to pursue Law with such exorbitant fees structure and that too for 05 years. Students not only pay too much but also lose too much of their precious time due to such a lengthy course.”
The petition highlights that legal icons like Ram Jethmalani and Fali Nariman thrived without being constrained by rigid systems.
Upadhyay notes,
“If late Sh. Ram Jethmalani can become a legend of the bar by starting his law career in just 17 years, then why should the youth waste 01 additional years of their life in the 05 years integrated course and not start their career from a younger age of 20-21 years?…Sh. Fali Nariman completed 03 years law after 12th at the age of 21 years. There are numerous examples of prodigies not being encumbered by a rigid system which focuses more on being the jack of all rather than being the master of one.”
The petition also expresses disappointment that the Central government has not yet established a Legal Education Commission for law courses, similar to the Medical Education Commission.
Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Vikas Singh, along with Advocates Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Deepika Kalia, Nikhil Upadhyay, Rohit Kumar Singh, Yash Johri, Saif Mahmood, Sumanta De, Shweta Priyadarshini, Nishi Singh, Rahul Shyam Bhandari, G Priyadharshni, Satyam Pathak, and Prabhakar Pahepuri represented the petitioner.
For the respondents, Senior Advocate Vivek K Tankha, R Bala, and Advocates Radhika Gautam, Anjul Dwivedi, Shrey Garf, Varun Tankha, Sumeer Sodhi, Harshit Joshi, Inder Dev Singh, Vipul Tiwari, Chaitanya Sharma, Sunita Gautam, N Visakamurthy, Anshuman Sharma, Sriharsh Nahush Bundela, Azaz Ahmed, and Naveen Kumar Yadav appeared.
Case Title: Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay V. Union of India and Ors
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
