Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.

com/abstract=1584037
!"#$%&'()#*()+(&)*%"#&%*"+$,&'(-).*/-0"*'1-$#1'/*2-!*!"2-!0*
/345647* 8493::;* <01!+* =;>?* @6* (=* A4BC* )$D/E* 467* /;>F>6* 0GH3:;I::* <!:9:4;J3*
&99>J@4K:C*)$D/E*
*
(6K;>7GJK@>6.*
!
This papei was initially piepaieu in the context of issues iaiseu by a iecent case befoie the
Supieme Couit of Inuia ("#$$%&!'()!*+!,()). Bowevei, as the note was being piepaieu, the
authois became moie ambitious anu went on to consiuei the iegulatoiy fiamewoik aiounu
legal euucation moie geneially anu to make some iecommenuations foi iefoim in this
iegaiu.

This papei begins by analysing the constitutional anu iegulatoiy fiamewoik peitaining to
legal euucation in Inuia with special emphasis on the two piincipal authoiities in this
spheie: The BCI anu the 0uC. It then goes on to uesciibe ambiguities anu ciiticism
iegaiuing the ambit of the BCI's poweis, anu accieuitation mechanisms in highei euucation
in a few othei countiies.

It then goes on to iecommenu iefoims, most of which can be effectuateu within the coineis
of the existing iegulatoiy fiamewoik, without the neeu foi statutoiy iefoim. 0theis may
iequiie statutoiy amenuments.

This note ueals with iefoim in thiee paits. The fiist pait ueals with the content of legal
euucation anu goes on to iecommenu that we iequiie a moie effective consultation piocess
between the BCI anu the 0niveisities. The seconu with the accieuitation, inspection anu
monitoiing anu goes on to iecommenu that iathei than impioving this funuamentally
flaweu piocess, we ought to have a Bai Exam. Bowevei, till such time as a statutoiy
amenument in this iegaiu comes about, the BCI may consiuei the intiouuction of post-
eniolment quality contiol mechanism which woulu go some way in achieving the uesiieu
goals, while iemaining within the iulemaking competence of the BCI.


The papei then goes on to ask whethei we ought to ieintiouuce an appienticeship
piogiamme anu concluues that we ought not to ieintiouuce apienticeship.

The thiiu pait iecommenus a complete oveihaul of the cuiient iegulatoiy mechanism
peitaining to legal euucation, such as the appointment of an inuepenuent iegulatoi.
Bowevei, this again will necessaiily entail amenuments to the existing statutoiy
fiamewoik.

Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1584037
The papei uiaws on the Law Commission anu the Supieme Couit's views in ielation to
legal euucation. It also unueitakes a compaiative analysis of the iegulatoiy mechanisms
pievailing in othei juiisuictions, wheievei possible.

!"#$%&'()'%*+$&#),--#(.*/',(0$-*.#$'($/"'0$(,/#$*&#$*0$1,++,203$
!
-&./0! &123/4%#$! 4#1/5! #2.64! 4#! &$3#78/++! 7236! 7#9&! 46/$! 7&9&05! 49/%$%$.! +421&$4+!
:#9! 46&! ;/9<! )$1&&1=! 46&! /%7! #2.64! 4#! ;&! 4#! 39&/4&! /$! &::&34%*&! +#3%/0! &$.%$&&9! >6#! %+!
+#3%/005!+&$+%4%*&!/$1!2+&+!46&!0/>!%$!759%/1!>/5+!4#!6&08!;&44&9!+#3%&45<!!
?6&! "@)! 6/+! $#! 0&./0A3#$+4%424%#$/0! /246#9%45! 4#! 9&.20/4&! 46&! :200! +8&34927! #:! 0&./0!
&123/4%#$=!%$1&8&$1&$4!#:!46&!,$%*&9+%4%&+<!)$!:/34=!B&34%#$!CDEFD6F!#:!46&!G1*#3/4&+!G34!
30&/905! 7&$4%#$+! 46/4! 46&! "@) is to lay uown stanuaius of legal euucation %$!
3#$+204/4%#$! >%46 the 0niveisities in Inuia impaiting such euucation anu the State
Bai Councils.!!
?6&9&:#9&! "@)! +6#201! 7/H&! /889#89%/4&! 36/$.&+! %$! 46&! 3#$+4%424%#$! #:! %4+! -&./0!
I123/4%#$! @#77%44&&! +#! 46/4=! %$! 0/5%$.! 1#>$! +4/$1/91+! #:! 0&./0! &123/4%#$=! &::&34%*&!
3#$+204/4%#$!>%46!46&!,$%*&9+%4%&+!4/H&+!80/3&=!/+!7/$1/4&1!;5!46&!G1*#3/4&+!G34<!J#9&!
/3/1&7%3+!$&&1!4#!:#97!8/94!#:!46&!0&./0!&123/4%#$!3#77%44&&!>%46%$!46&!"/9!@#2$3%0<!
G$! /00K)$1%/! "/9! I$49/$3&! IL/7%$/4%#$! +6#201! ;&! %$49#123&1! /+! /! M2/0%45K3#$49#0!
7&36/$%+7=! %$+4&/1! #:! 46&! &L%+4%$.! /339&1%4/4%#$! +5+4&7! >6%36! %+! 8/4&$405! :0/>&1=!
%$&::&34%*&=! 3#+405! /$1! +2;N&34! 4#! /;2+&<! )4! >%00! $#4! #$05! &$+29&! /! M2/0%4/4%*&! 36&3H! #$!
46&! $27;&9! #:! 0/>5&9+! &$4&9%$.! 46&! "/9=! ;24! >#201! /0+#! .%*&! 46&! "/9! @#2$3%0! +3#8&! 4#!
9&.20/4&!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!/!7#9&!9#;2+4!7/$$&9<!!
O#>&*&9=!4%00!+236!4%7&!/+!/!+4/424#95!/7&$17&$4!%$!46%+!9&./91!3#7&+!/;#24=!46&!"@)!
7/5! 3#$+%1&9! 46&! %$49#1234%#$! #:! 8#+4K&$9#07&$4! M2/0%45! 3#$49#0! 7&36/$%+7! >6%36!
>#201! .#! +#7&! >/5! %$! /36%&*%$.! 46&! 1&+%9&1! .#/0+=! >6%0&! 9&7/%$%$.! >%46%$! 46&!
920&7/H%$.!3#78&4&$3&!#:!46&!"@)<!
G046#2.6!/!3#7820+#95!;/9!&L/7!7/H&+!:#9!/$!#84%7/0!9&.20/4#95!7&/+29&=!>&!1#!$#4!
+288#94! /! 3#99&+8#$1%$.! /889&$4%3&+6%8! +5+4&7! 46/4! 6/1! ;&&$! %$+4%424&1! ;5! 46&! "/9!
@#2$3%0!%$!EPPQ!/$1!46&9&/:4&9!+4923H!1#>$!/+!2$3#$+4%424%#$/0!;5!46&!B289&7&!@#294!
%$! 46&! R! B216&&9! 3/+&<! '#9! #$&=! +236! /! 9&M2%9&7&$4! 7/5! ;&! 1%::%3204! 4#! 7#$%4#9! :#9!
&::&34%*&! 3#780%/$3&<! B&3#$105=! .%*&$! 46&! )$1%/$! 89/34%3&! #:! %$:#97/0! 424&0/.&! ;5!
+&$%#9+=!3#$*&94%$.!46%+!4#!/!7/$1/4#95!#;0%./4%#$!7/5!;&!2$$&3&++/95<!!
G+! /! 7#9&! +2;+4/$4%*&! 8#0%35! 7&/+29&=! >&! 9&3#77&$1! /! 7#9&! 46#9#2.6! #*&96/20! #:!
46&!89&+&$4!9&.20/4#95!+4923429&!8&94/%$%$.!4#!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!)$1%/<!?6&!"@)!8#>&9+!
+6#201! #$05! &L4&$1! 4#! 9&.20/4%$.! 46/4! /+8&34! #:! 0&./0! &123/4%#$! 46/4! %+! %$49%$+%3/005!
3#$$&34&1! >%46! 46&! 89/34%3&! #:! 0/>! /4! 46&! "/9<! B#7&! #:! 46&! 9&.20/4#95! :2$34%#$+! 46/4!
/9&!89&+&$405!;&%$.!8&9:#97&1!;5!46&!"@)=!/$1!>6%36!1#!$#4!9&0/4&!1%9&3405!4#!89/34%3&!
/4!46&!"/9!+6#201!;&!1&*#0*&1!4#!/$#46&9!/246#9%45<!?6%+!/246#9%45!+6#201!%1&/005!;&!/!
+4/$1%$.! 3#77%44&&! #$! 0&./0! &123/4%#$! 2$1&9! 46&! )SGOI! /+! 89#8#+&1! ;5! 46&! TU@<!
O#>&*&9=!46%+!+2..&+4%#$!%+!;&5#$1!46&!+3#8&!:#9!46&!89&+&$4!3/+&!;&%$.!1&3%1&1!;5!46&!
@#294=! /+! 46%+! %$*#0*&+! +4/424#95! /7&$17&$4+<! G$1! 46&! 3#294! 7/5! /4! ;&+4=! 9&3#77&$1!
+236!/7&$17&$4+!4#!46&!V/90%/7&$4<!

*
*
(L*'1"*,$!!")'*!"#$%&'-!M*/'!$,'$!"*
0nuei the cuiient iegulatoiy stiuctuie goveining legal euucation in Inuia, thiee bouies
play a piominent iole i.e. the Bai Council of Inuia playing the most piominent iole, the 0uC
(0niveisity uiants Commission), anu the 0niveisities themselves. uiven that the Bai
Council is by fai, the most piominent amongst all these iegulatoiy bouies, we begin by
uiscussing the iole of the Bai Council anu then go on to highlight pioblems of conflict
aiising fiom not so cleaily uiawn out teiiitoiial uomains of these iespective iegulatoiy
bouies.
&L*%:N4A*"7GJ4K@>6*467*K3:*=>B:;9*>?*K3:*8,(*
The Bai Council of Inuia uiaws its iegulatoiy poweis fiom the Auvocates Act, 1961 |"K3:*
&JK"j. This Act uiaws constitutional legitimacy fiom entiies 77 anu 78 of List I of the
Seventh Scheuule of the Constitution
1
which %$4&9! /0%/, ueal with "peisons entitleu to
piactice befoie the Supieme Couit" anu "peisons entitleu to piactice befoie the Bigh
Couits."
0nuei Section 7(1)(h) of the Act, the Bai Council of Inuia |"8,("j has been entiusteu with
the uuty "to piomote legal euucation anu to lay uown stanuaius of such euucation in
consultation with the 0niveisities in Inuia impaiting such euucation anu the State Bai
Councils." Fuitheimoie, it is empoweieu to "to iecognise 0niveisities whose uegiee in law
shall be a qualification foi eniolment as an auvocate anu foi that puipose to visit anu
inspect 0niveisities oi cause the State Bai Councils to visit anu inspect 0niveisities in
accoiuance with such uiiections as it may give in this behalf."
2
The Act also pioviues that a
citizen of Inuia will be entitleu to be aumitteu as an Auvocate if he has obtaineu a uegiee
fiom a 0niveisity in Inuia which is iecogniseu by the BCI.
S

The BCI also has the powei to make iules piesciibing qualifications foi membeiship of a
Bai Council anu the uisqualifications foi such membeiship;
4
the minimum qualifications
iequiieu foi aumission to a couise of uegiee in law in any iecogniseu 0niveisity;
S
anu the
stanuaius of legal euucation to be obseiveu by 0niveisities in Inuia incluuing the powei to
caiiy out inspections of 0niveisities foi that puipose.
6


1
O.N. Mohindroo vs. Bar Council, AIR 1968 SC 888; Bar Council of UP vs. State of UP, AIR 1973 SC 231.
2
The Advocates Act, 1961, Section 7(1)(i).
3
Ibid, Section 24(1).
4
Ibid, Section 49(1)(ab).
5
Ibid, Section 49(1)(af).
6
Ibid, Section 49(1)(d).
The afoiementioneu piovisions appeai to vest the BCI with consiueiable powei to
influence the stanuaiu anu content of legal euucation. The BCI has useu these piovisions to
piesciibe the content, syllabi anu uuiation of the law uegiee as a pie-conuition to the
confeiment of iecognition. By fiaming a seiies of Resolutions, Rules anu Regulations - of
which the most impoitant is the Bai Council Rules on Legal Euucation, 2uu8 - the BCI has
also imposeu conuitions ielating to the establishment of law schools, builuings anu
appointment of faculty. This situation came about paiticulaily because theie was no othei
iegulatoi chaigeu with the iesponsibility of auuiessing these specific issues.
*
8L*&5O@NG@K@:9*@6*K3:*!:NGA4K>;F*2;45:B>;H.*8,(*P9*$#,*P9*$6@P:;9@K@:9
Legal euucation is also goveineu, to some extent, by noims laiu uown by the 0niveisity
uiants Commission |"$#,"j, a bouy entiusteu with the task of iegulating highei euucation
geneially in Inuia. This bouy is goveineu by the 0niveisity uiants Commission Act, 19S6
|"$#,*&JK"j, an enactment that ueiives its legitimacy fiom Entiy 66 of List I of the Seventh
Scheuule of the Constitution,
7
which ieaus as: "Cooiuination anu ueteimination of
stanuaius in institutions foi highei euucation oi ieseaich anu scientific anu technical
institutions."
The Pieamble to the 0uC Act states that the Act is intenueu "to make piovision foi the co-
oiuination anu ueteimination of stanuaius in 0niveisities." Fuitheimoie, Section 12, which
ueals with '2$34%#$+! #:! 46&! @#77%++%#$, states that "it shall be the geneial uuty of the
Commission to take, in consultation with the 0niveisities oi othei bouies conceineu, all
such steps as it may think fit foi the piomotion anu co-oiuination of 0niveisity euucation
anu foi the ueteimination anu maintenance of stanuaius of teaching, examination anu
ieseaich in 0niveisities." The Supieme Couit has also emphasizeu the iole of the 0uC "in
shaping the acauemic life of the countiy" anu its "uuty to maintain a high stanuaiu in the
0niveisities."
8
Fiom the foiegoing uiscussion, it is cleai that the 0uC is the pieeminent
bouy chaigeu with the iesponsibility of ueteimining anu maintaining stanuaius of
euucation in 0niveisities.
Bowevei, the iespective bounus of the 0uC, the BCI anu the 0niveisities themselves in
teims of theii iole in iegulating legal euucation have not been uiawn out cleaily, leauing

7
Prem Chand Jain v. R. K. Chhabra, AIR 1984 SC 981, 984.
8
Osmania University Teachers Association v. State of A. P., AIR 1987 SC 2034, 2043.
the Fiist National Consultation Confeience of Beaus of Legal Euucational Institutions
(2uu2) to obseive:
9


W?6&!9&.20/4#95!+4923429&!:#9!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!)$1%/!%+!3299&$405!+&9%#2+05!:0/>&1!/$1!$&&1+!
3/9&:20! 9&3#$+%1&9/4%#$<! G! 458%3/0! 0/>! 3#00&.&! 6/+! :#29! 7/+4&9+! /4! /! 7%$%727X! 46&! ,$%*&9+%45!
4#!>6%36!%4!%+!/::%0%/4&1Y!46&!B4/4&!Z#*&9$7&$4=!46&!,$%*&9+%45!Z9/$4+!@#77%++%#$!/$1!46&!"/9!
@#2$3%0!#:!)$1%/<!?6&+&!:#29!/.&$3%&+!6/*&!*/95%$.!7/$1/4&+=!%$4&9&+4+!/$1!3#$+4%42&$3%&+!/$1!
1#!$#4!89#*%1&!3#6&9&$4!.2%1/$3&!:#9!46&!%789#*&7&$4!#:!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!46&!3#2$495<[!

A scholai likewise states:
1u

Policy-making in Inuian legal euucation is uncooiuinateu, anu is
chaiacteiiseu by a gieat ueal of hostility between the piincipal piotagonists -
the Bai Council of Inuia, the 0uC, anu the inuiviuual univeisities themselves.
This cannot boue well foi the futuie of legal euucation in Inuia.

The 1989 Repoit of the Cuiiiculum Bevelopment Centie in Law, whose piincipal authoi
was Piof. 0penuia Baxi, similaily points out the seemingly oveilapping poweis anu
ambiguities extant in the piesent fiamewoik. The Repoit goes on to explain how the thiee
piincipal playeis - the BCI, the 0uC anu the 0niveisities - have, ovei the yeais, been
ineffective in biinging about substantive changes in legal euucational policy.
11

*
,L*'3:*8,(Q9*,>5R:K:6J:*G67:;*,34AA:6N:*
In the absence of a specializeu bouy that is explicitly entiusteu with the task of iegulating
legal euucation, theie is natuially a gieat ueal of confusion about the scope of the BCI's
poweis in this iegaiu, anu the valiuity of many of its actions.
Nany have accuseu the BCI of oveistepping its manuate. The Repoit of the Woiking uioup
on Legal Euucation constituteu by the National Knowleuge Commission |")S,* !:R>;K"j
claims that the BCI's Rules, Ciiculais anu Regulations ielating to aspects of legal euucation
othei than entiy into the Bai aie beyonu the scope of peimissible uelegateu legislation anu
theiefoie invaliu.
12
The Fiist National Consultation Confeience of Beaus of Legal
Euucational Institutions (2uu2) likewise wanteu the BCI to concein itself only with the

9
Draft Report of the First National Consultation Conference of Heads of Legal Educational Institutions (Bangalore,
12 August 2002), p. 10.
10
Thiruvengadam, The Waning of a Magnificent Obsession: An abridged story of the history of legal educational
reform in India (unpublished), p. 43.
11
Report of the Curriculum Development Centre in Law (Vol 1), University Grants Commission (1988), p. 22-24.
12
Report of the Working Group on Legal Education, National Knowledge Commission (2007), p. 14, 15.
minimum stanuaius necessaiy foi entiy into the Bai. It uesiieu the BCI to be "iesponsible
only foi iegulating entiy into the legal piofession anu maintenance of piofessional
stanuaius iathei than foi legal euucation."
1S
Piof. Nanik Sinha, Bean, Bi. RNL Avauh
0niveisity, has also aigueu that the saiu Rules, Ciiculais anu Regulations aie outsiue the
scope of poweis anu juiisuiction of the BCI.
14

In fact, one such iule was stiuck uown by the Supieme Couit. In R<!B21&&9!*<!"/9!@#2$3%0!#:!
)$1%/
1S
|"/G7::;"j, the Supieme Couit hau the occasion to consiuei the valiuity of the Bai
Council of Inuia Tiaining Rules, 199S foimulateu by the Bai Council. The Rules iequiieu a
law giauuate to unueigo tiaining foi an auuitional yeai aftei completing his giauuation.
The Supieme Couit helu that the BCI uiu not have the iulemaking authoiity to piesciibe
conuitions foi tiaining anu examinations aftei giauuation. If the BCI wanteu to initiate such
measuies, it woulu fiist have to amenu the Act to confei such poweis unto itself; the Couit
theiefoie stiuck uown the Rules as 2049/! *%9&+. The Couit also maue some impoitant
obseivations iegaiuing the neeu foi appienticeship anu a Bai examination, which have
been uiscusseu in a subsequent section of this papei.
0nfoitunately, the Supieme Couit in Suueei uiu not cleaily lay uown the exact ambit of the
Bai Council's poweis. Anu thus fai, theie has been no compiehensive Supieme Couit iuling
on the poweis of the BCI.
Absent such claiification, actions of the BCI peitaining to legal euucation aie likely to be
challengeu. Foi example, the BCI's iecent move towaius fixing an uppei limit foi aumission
into LLB couises immeuiately met with challenges befoie vaiious Bigh Couits.
16
A cleaiei
legal position in this issue woulu eliminate such avoiuable litigation. The vaiious bouies
chaigeu with iegulating legal euucation woulu also be able to take positive steps without
the appiehension of facing litigation, anu the neeu to uefenu theii legal competence at
eveiy step.
It is theiefoie impeiative to ueteimine the constitutionally peimissible limits of the BCI's
iegulatoiy poweis, in so fai as legal euucation is conceineu.
((L*!"2-!0()#*%"#&%*"+$,&'(-).*/-0"*=!-=-/&%/*

13
Supra note 9.
14
Sinha Interference of Bar Council of India in Legal Education: Its Legality and Justifiability in Legal Education
in India in the 21st Century, Kaul & Ahuja (eds.), (1999), p. 241.
15
AIR 1999 SC 1167.
16
See e.g. WRIT PETITION NO. 5225 /2009 (PIL) before the High Court at M.P., available at
http://legumbaccalaureus.com/post/PIL-against-RULES-ON-LEGAL-EDUCATION-2008-framed-by-BAR-
COUNCIL-OF-INDIA.aspx (last visited: 22 July 2009).
&L*'3:*)::7*?>;*0>;:*,>69GAK4K@>6*B@K3*$6@P:;9@K@:9*
Bespite some ambiguity in ueteimining the piecise bounus of the BCI's authoiity foi
iegulating legal euucation, what is cleai is that the BCI cannot fiame noims of its own
accoiu, but has to consult with 0niveisities befoie uoing so.
17

Till uate, the BCI's piocess of consultation has been fai fiom optimal. This has been pointeu
out by seveial expeits, incluuing the Woiking uioup on Legal Euucation constituteu by the
National Knowleuge Commission |")S,"j. In paiticulai, the NKC asseiteu that theie is no
effective consultation with the 0niveisities as manuateu by Section 7(1)(h) of the Act,
18

since the Legal Euucation Committee of the BCI constituteu unuei Section 1u(2)(b) of the
Act consists of 1u membeis, out of whom only one is a faculty membei. Similaily, Piof.
uuiueep Singh iefeis to a laige numbei of pioblems aiising out of a cuiiiculum change
intiouuceu by the BCI which coulu have conceivably been avoiueu if theie was effective
piioi consultation with the Faculty.
19
Rules issueu by the BCI have been stiuck uown by the
Supieme Couit fiom time to time on the giounu that theie was no effective consultation
with the 0niveisities.
2u

The Law Commission too has noteu "seiious complaints fiom managements anu faculty
that some of the Bai Council's uiiectives tenu to be aibitiaiy."
21
Recently, seveial colleges
in Pune have also expiesseu theii uissatisfaction at the ievision of iules on legal euucation
by the BCI without effective consultation being caiiieu out.
22

Cuiient piactices among national law schools also suppoit the conclusion that the BCI's
iules, paiticulaily insofai as they piesciibe 0niveisity cuiiicula, tenu to be aibitiaiy anu
impiactical. A goou instance is pioviueu by the BCI's ieviseu Rules on Legal Euucation,
which have technically come into foice fiom the acauemic yeai 2uu9-1u. While the ieviseu
iules weie appioveu anu auopteu at the BCI's meeting on Septembei 14, 2uu8, theie was a

17
Under Section 7(1)(h), The Advocates Act, 1961, the BCI is entrusted with the duty to promote legal education
and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the Universities in India imparting such education
and the State Bar Councils.
18
Report of the Working Group on Legal Education, National Knowledge Commission (2007) at para. 3.5.1.
19
Singh, Revamping professional legal education: Some observations on the LL.B curriculum revised by the Bar
Council of India in Kaul & Ahuja (eds.), Legal Education in India in 21st Century: Problems and Prospects
(1999).
20
See Gopal Krishan Chatrath vs Bar Council of India through its Secretary AIR 2001 P&H 41; and the Supreme
Courts decision reported at http://www.hindu.com/2006/07/16/stories/2006071619261400.htm.
21
184
th
Report of the Law Commission of India (2002), para. 4.5.
22
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Pune/Colleges_resent_bar_councils_rules/articleshow/4090458.cms (last
visited: 23 July 2009). The second limb of criticism relates to the process of inspection under Section 7(1)(i) of the
Act for the purpose of granting accreditation to colleges. This issue has been discussed in more detail at II.B.1
infra.
significant time lapse befoie they weie actually ciiculateu among the 0niveisities.
2S

Fuitheimoie, the Rules stipulate that the integiateu Five Yeais' couise (foi B.A., LL.B.)
must contain one majoi anu two minoi subjects in social science anu language. A stuuent is
iequiieu to take no fewei than 6 papeis in the majoi subject anu thiee S each in minoi anu
in languages.
0nuei the cuiient cuiiiculum followeu in most national law schools that offei the thiee
yeai couise, the stuuent stuuies a laigei numbei of social science subjects (e.g. Economics,
Bistoiy, Sociology anu Political Science). 0n the othei hanu, unuei the BCI Rules, the
stuuent is iequiieu to stuuy a lessei numbei of social science subjects (thiee, to be exact)
but in gieat uetail. In fact, most law schools meiely pioviue one oi two papeis in each
social science subject, wheieas the Bai Council noims iequiie at least 6 papeis in one of the
social science subjects (the "majoi"). Foi one, consiueiing the piefeiieu caieei choices foi
stuuents fiom national law schools, one is not entiiely suie if such an extensive stuuy of a
social science subject is uesiiable fiom a policy peispective. 0ne might aigue that if the BA
component in the integiateu BALLB is to have some meaning, a social science subject has to
be stuuieu in uetail. Anu that such extensive integiation of a BA subject is essential if one
wishes to fuithei a "multi uisciplinaiy" peispective into the stuuy of law. The pios anu cons
of such an extensive stuuy of social sciences notwithstanuing, what has to be kept in minu
is that policy uecisions of this natuie ought to have come aftei extensive consultations with
the National law schools. Theie is no eviuence to inuicate that such consultations weie
caiiieu out piioi to amenuing the cuiiiculum in this fashion. Even woise, 0niveisities weie
not given enough time foi compliance with these uiastically changeu noims. As one can
appieciate, such a significant change in theii couise stiuctuie anu syllabus may have
entaileu the new faculty, the piocuiement of othei iesouices anu peihaps the iestiuctuiing
of the entiie teaching scheuule etc.
It is no wonuei then that none of the National law schools which offei the five-yeai
integiateu couise so fai have changeu theii cuiiicula to ensuie compliance with the
Rules.
24

Bau theie been effective consultation as manuateu by the Auvocates Act, the BCI in fiaming
its cuiiiculum coulu have enjoyeu the benefit of the wiue expeiience anu knowleuge which
some 0niveisity piofessois possess. Its iules coulu theieby have been moie ielevant to the
neeus of the times, anu also piactically feasible fiom the peispective of implementation.

23
Ibid.
24
See e.g. course structure of the NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad (at
http://nalsar.ac.in/academic_programes.html) and of the National Law School of India University, Bangalore (at
http://www.nls.ac.in/academic_programmes_undergraduate_courses.html).
The Law Commission's iecommenuations in this iegaiu may go a long way towaius
auuiessing the giievances noteu above.
2S
The Law Commission has iecommenueu that the
0uC shoulu constitute a Committee on Legal Euucation, which is iepiesentative of all
0niveisities anu affiliateu law schools. Consultation must then be with an acauemic bouy of
ten eminent law teacheis to be nominateu by the 0uC. It has also iecommenueu that the
0uC shoulu nominate thiee law teacheis who aie membeis of the 0uC Legal Euucation
Committee to be membeis of the Legal Euucation Committee of the BCI, so that they can co-
oiuinate the uecisions taken by the Committees of the 0uC anu the BCI iespectively.
26

The Law Commission has fuithei iecommenueu that the fiist stage of consultation shoulu
be with the State Bai Councils, as at piesent. Aftei such consultation, the BCI's Legal
Euucation Committee will piovisionally finalise its pioposals foi the puipose of the fuithei
consultation with the 0uC Committee on Legal Euucation.
27
The Law Commission has also
iecommenueu a sepaiate pioceuuie wheieby the 0uC Committee on Legal Euucation may
initiate anu senu its suggestions to the Legal Euucation Committee of the BCI. In that event,
the lattei Committee shall fiist consult the State Bai Councils anu then aftei aiiiving at a
piovisional view, iefei the same to the Legal Euucation Committee of the 0uC. The saiu
Committee will give its final views anu foiwaiu the same to the Legal Euucation Committee
of the Bai Council of Inuia.
28

Anothei impoitant iecommenuation is that, in the event of new cuiiiculum iequiiements
being intiouuceu by the BCI, sufficient auvance notice must be given to the law schools so
that they can take steps to confoim to the piesciiptions.
29
To achieve the afoiementioneu
objectives, the Law Commission has iecommenueu the inseition of section 1uAA in the
Auvocates Act, pioviuing foi consultation pioceuuie,
Su
anu the inseition of section SA in
the 0niveisity uiants Commission Act foi constitution of the Legal Euucation Committee.
S1

It is hopeu that the expeuitious implementation of these iecommenuations will ensuie
moie effective consultation between the BCI anu legal acauemia, anu ensuie a moie
ielevant anu effective set of guiuelines on legal euucation.
8L*'>B4;79*4*84;*"T45U*

25
184
th
Report of the Law Commission of India (2002), at Ch. IV.
26
Ibid at para. 4.0.
27
Ibid at para. 4.3.
28
Ibid at para. 4.4.
29
Ibid at para. 4.5.
30
Ibid at para. 4.20.
31
Ibid at para. 4.21.
Apait fiom the powei to iegulate the content of legal euucation, the BCI has also been
vesteu with the powei to accieuit anu inspect 0niveisities impaiting legal euucation with a
view to ensuiing that appiopiiate stanuaius aie maintaineu.
Specifically, unuei Section 7(1)(i), the BCI is empoweieu to "to iecognise 0niveisities whose
uegiee in law shall be a qualification foi eniolment as an auvocate anu foi that puipose to
visit anu inspect 0niveisities oi cause the State Bai Councils to visit anu inspect
0niveisities in accoiuance with such uiiections as it may give in this behalf." The Act goes
on to pioviue that a citizen of Inuia will be entitleu to be aumitteu as an Auvocate if he has
obtaineu a uegiee fiom a 0niveisity in Inuia which is iecogniseu by the BCI.
S2

The Act also pioviues the BCI with powei to inspect anu monitoi law schools with a view to
ensuiing that the stanuaius piesciibeu aie maintaineu.
SS

VL*+:?@J@:6J@:9*@6*K3:*(69R:JK@>6*467*&JJ;:7@K4K@>6*=;>J:7G;:*
Theie is wiuespieau consensus that uespite the "iapiu, even uncontiolleu, inciease in the
numbei of law colleges in the countiy," stanuaius of legal euucation have on the whole
ueteiioiateu.
S4
The Repoit of the Ahmaui Committee (1994) has pointeu out that the BCI
has gianteu peimission to a laige numbei of law schools which have veiy pooi stanuaius
anu infiastiuctuie. Seveial of these colleges aie locateu in iemote places, anu theii faculty
anu libiaiy facilities aie extiemely ueficient. The NKC Repoit suggests that the inspections
by the Bai Councils have faileu in theii woik.
SS
Theie aie also conceins that "the inspectoi
iaj is subject to abuse anu coiiuption."
S6

The Law Commission has affiimeu that the Rules ielating to inspection aie %$49/!*%9&+ of the
Act.
S7
While asseiting that inspections aie necessaiy, the Commission has aumitteu that the
inspection piocess neeus to be ievampeu. It notes the complaints of some colleges to the
effect that, though they have complieu with all the iequiiements neeueu foi affiliation, they
aie still not gianteu peimanent affiliation. Consequently, theie aie inspections eveiy yeai
anu sometimes even moie fiequently, anu each time the managements aie askeu to ueposit
a minimum of Rs.Su,uuu- as inspection fee. Theie aie also complaints that the

32
Ibid, Section 24(1).
33
Ibid, Section 49(1)(d).
34
Supra note 10 at p. 18.
35
Supra note 12 at para. 3.6.1.
36
Kapur & Mehta, Mortgaging the Future? Indian Higher Education in Brookings-NCAER India Policy Forum
2007-08, Vol. 4 (2008), p. 101.
37
Supra note 22 at para. 8.3.1.
expenuituies foi the inspection team aie becoming too gieat anu posing a buiuen on the
colleges.
S8

0n the othei hanu, theie aie complaints that some inspections aie cuisoiy anu colleges
which aie bauly iun aie given a "clean chit".
S9
The Commission has also noteu that theie
aie seveial couit cases fileu by managements against the BCI, some of which have been
alloweu with ciitical obseivations against the mannei in which inspections weie conuucteu
oi uisaffiliation pioposeu.
4u

WL*!:?>;5@6N*K3:*X&JJ;:7@K4K@>6Y*=;>J:99.*&*,>5R4;4K@P:*=:;9R:JK@P:*
Consiueiing the ueeply flaweu system which is cuiiently in place, the Law Commission's
iecommenuations
41
may be iathei milu anu not sufficient to ieally auuiess the pioblems
inheient in inspect anu accieuitation. A thoiough oveihaul of the system is calleu foi, so as
to ensuie gieatei accountability, inciease tianspaiency, minimize expenses anu
stanuaiuize the inspection pioceuuie. 0ne option foi iefoim woulu be to focus on the
cuiient accieuitation anu inspection pioceuuie anu iemove any scope foi bias, anu
incompetence in this monitoiing piocess. Illustiatively, one might consiuei assistance anu
involvement of piofessional agencies may be sought foi the accieuitation piocess.
In fact, this is uone in some of the Westein countiies, as explaineu below:
The $6@K:7* /K4K:9 has no Feueial Ninistiy of Euucation oi othei centializeu authoiity
exeicising single national contiol ovei postseconuaiy euucational institutions in this
countiy. The States assume vaiying uegiees of contiol ovei euucation, but, in geneial,
institutions of highei euucation aie peimitteu to opeiate with consiueiable inuepenuence
anu autonomy. As a consequence, Ameiican euucational institutions can vaiy wiuely in the
chaiactei anu quality of theii piogiams.
In oiuei to ensuie a basic level of quality, the piactice of accieuitation aiose in the 0niteu
States as a means of conuucting non-goveinmental, peei evaluation of euucational
institutions anu piogiams. The goals of accieuitation incluue: ensuiing that euucation
pioviueu by institutions of highei euucation meets acceptable levels of quality, assisting
piospective stuuents in iuentifying acceptable institutions, helping to iuentify institutions
anu piogiams foi the investment of public anu piivate funus, etc. Accieuitation in the
0niteu States involves non-goveinmental entities as well as goveinmental agencies.

38
Ibid at para. 8.5.
39
Ibid at para. 8.6.
40
Ibid at para. 8.7.
41
Ibid at para. 8.12 - 8.13.
Accieuiting agencies, which aie piivate euucational associations of iegional oi national
scope, uevelop evaluation ciiteiia anu conuuct peei evaluations to assess whethei oi not
those ciiteiia aie met. Institutions anuoi piogiams that iequest an agency's evaluation
anu that meet an agency's ciiteiia aie then 'accieuiteu' by that agency.
The 0.S. Bepaitment of Euucation uoes not accieuit euucational institutions anuoi
piogiams. Bowevei, the Secietaiy of Euucation is iequiieu by law to publish a list of
nationally iecognizeu accieuiting agencies that the Secietaiy ueteimines to be ieliable
authoiities as to the quality of euucation oi tiaining pioviueu by the institutions of highei
euucation anu the highei euucation piogiams they accieuit.
In #:;546F, The Stanuing Confeience of the Ninisteis of Euucation anu Cultuial Affaiis of
the -\$1&9 in the Feueial Republic of ueimany
42
(U2042+7%$%+4&9H#$:&9&$] oi KNK) is an
auvisoiy bouy to the Feueial uoveinment anu the state (Lnuei) goveinments. It was
founueu in 1948 by an agieement between the states of the Feueial Republic of ueimany.
Among its coie iesponsibilities, the KNK ensuies quality uevelopment anu continuity in
teitiaiy euucation. Bacheloi anu Nastei piogiammes must be accieuiteu in accoiuance to a
iesolution of the KNK. The ueiman Council of Science anu Bumanities (^%++&$+36/:4+9/4)
founueu in 19S7 has been conuucting institutional accieuitation of piivate anu ieligious
univeisities since 2uu1.
In the $6@K:7*S@6N7>5, it is illegal to offei a qualification that is oi might seem to be a 0K
uegiee unless the awaiuing bouy is iecogniseu by the Secietaiy of State, a Royal Chaitei oi
Act of Pailiament to giant uegiees.
4S
0nuei the Business Names Act 198S, it is also an
offence foi any business in the 0K to use the woiu 'univeisity' in its name without the
foimal appioval of the Piivy Council. Piivate highei anu fuithei euucation institutions (as
uistinguisheu fiom the qualifications that they offei) aie uniegulateu, but may choose to
become accieuiteu by vaiious non-iegulatoiy bouies such as the Biitish Accieuitation
Council oi the Biitish Council anu Accieuitation Seivice foi Inteinational Colleges in oiuei
to uemonstiate thiiu-paity assessment of the quality of euucation they offei.
0nfoitunately, uespite the peiceiveu auvantages of having accieuitation unueitaken by
inuepenuent piofessional agencies, the cuiient statutoiy fiamewoik in Inuia uoes not
peimit any othei agency othei than the BCI to unueitake accieuitation.

In any case, it is impoitant to appieciate that an effective inspection pioceuuie by itself will
not guaiantee quality of the Bai. Inspection anu uisaffiliation aie useful foi weeuing out

42
See http://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/engl-fields.htm#UNI (last visited: 28 July 2009).
43
S. 214, The Education Reform Act, 1988.
'teaching shops' set up puiely foi commeicial puiposes; but they cannot, except maiginally,
impiove quality contiol anu piouuctivity.
44


We theiefoie iecommenu that an all-Inuia Bai Entiance Examination shoulu be intiouuceu
as a quality-contiol mechanism, insteau of the existing accieuitation system which is
patently flaweu, ineffective, costly anu subject to abuse. It will not only ensuie a qualitative
check on the numbei of lawyeis enteiing the Bai, but woulu also give the Bai Council scope
to iegulate legal euucation in a moie iobust mannei. It may be noteu that such an all Inuia
bai exam was iecommenueu by the Ahmaui Committee, as uetaileu below:

ZL*'>B4;79*4*84;*"T45*@6*(67@4.*'3:*%@5@K4K@>69*>?*[*/G7::;*

The Confeience of the Chief }ustices (Becembei, 199S) iesolveu that a Committee be
constituteu with }ustice A.N. Ahmaui as its Chaiiman, to suggest appiopiiate steps so that
law giauuates may acquiie sufficient expeiience befoie they become entitleu to piactise in
the couits. The Ahmaui Committee Repoit (1994) iecommenueu (a) an appienticeship of
12 oi 18 months unuei a senioi lawyei; anu (b) an entiance examination, as pieiequisites
foi eniolment into the Bai.
4S

0nfoitunately, in Suueei, the Supieme Couit helu that the piesent statutoiy scheme uoes
not vest the BCI with poweis to impose a bai exam oi an appienticeship. We consiuei this
iuling anu its vaiious limitations in helping us fiame appiopiiate policy suggestions foi
betteiing legal euucation in Inuia.
In oiuei to give effect to the Ahmaui Recommenuations outlineu above, the BCI hau
piomulgateu the Bai Council of Inuia Tiaining Rules, 199S stipulating a bai exam anu a
one-yeai tiaining iequiiement soon aftei a canuiuate hau passeu the LLB examination. The
move met with wiuespieau piotests fiom bouies of law stuuents all ovei Inuia.
46
Seveial
wiit petitions weie fileu in vaiious Bigh Couits all ovei Inuia challenging the competence
of the Bai Council of Inuia to issue the Tiaining Rules.
The mattei went up to the Supieme Couit, anu the Couit stiuck uown the impugneu iules
as being 2049/!*%9&+!the iulemaking poweis of the BCI.
47


44
N.R. Madhava Menon, Few Thoughts on Reforming Legal Education, Indian Bar Review (1995) Vol. 22 (4), p.
67 at 69.
45
Report on Reforms in Legal Education and Entry into Legal Profession, Indian Bar Review Vol. 42 (4) 1995, p. 7
at 33-34.
46
Ibid at p. 42.

Fiist we biiefly ieview the juuicial uelimitation of the BCI's poweis in B21&&9! because, in
auvancing iecommenuations foi the fiaming of new iules, it is impeiative to ensuie that
such iules aie within the statutoiy competence of the BCI.

Section 7 of the Act ueals with functions of the BCI. 0nuei Section 7(1)(h), the BCI's
function is to piomote legal euucation anu to lay uown stanuaius of such euucation in
consultation with the 0niveisities in Inuia impaiting such euucation anu the State Bai
Councils. The Couit in Suueei uelimiteu the scope of this clause by holuing that the
question of impaiting legal euucation is entiusteu to the 0niveisities in Inuia anu not to the
BCI. The Couit conceueu that 'legal euucation' is not necessaiily confineu to only class
ioom lectuies oi theoietical stuuy of law. Bowevei, baseu on the woiuing of the Section, it
helu that all that the BCI can uo is to suggest ways anu means to piomote such legal
euucation to be impaiteu by the 0niveisities anu foi that puipose it may lay uown the
stanuaius of euucation, syllabi in consultation with the 0niveisities in Inuia. Theiefoie,
laying uown pie-eniolment tiaining foi applicants seeking to entei legal piofession uoes
not fall within the functions of the BCI.

Section 24 of the Act ueals with peisons who may be aumitteu as auvocates on a State ioll.
Sub-section (1) lays uown the conuitions which a peison must fulfil in oiuei to be qualifieu
to be aumitteu as an auvocate on a State ioll. Section 24(S)(u) states that notwithstanuing
anything containeu in sub-section (1), unuei ceitain ciicumstances, a peison who is
entitleu to be eniolleu as an auvocate unuei any iule maue by the BCI in this behalf may be
aumitteu as an auvocate on a State ioll. The Supieme Couit helu that the powei unuei
Section 24(S)(u) coulu be utiliseu foi making otheiwise ineligible peisons eligible foi
eniolment, but it coulu nevei be utiliseu in the ieveise uiiection foi uisqualifying those
fiom eniolment who weie otheiwise qualifieu to be eniolleu. It was a powei given to the
Bai Council of Inuia to extenu the coveiage of Section 24(1) anu not to whittle it uown. The
effect of this holuing is that the Clause cannot be useu to specify auuitional conuitions foi
eniolment.

Finally, Section 49 of the Act ueals with geneial powei of the BCI to make iules. The
iesponuents attempteu to locate the BCI's authoiity foi fiaming the impugneu Rules within
Clauses (af), (ag) anu (ah) of Sub-section 49(1). Rejecting iesponuents' aiguments, the
Couit iightly helu that the iule-making powei entiusteu to the BCI by the legislatuie is an
ancillaiy powei foi fiuctifying anu effectively uischaiging its statutoiy functions laiu uown
by the Act. Rules fiameu unuei Section 49 must have a statutoiy peg on which to hang,
wheieas the impugneu Rules weie not maue foi uischaiging any of the statutoiy functions
of the BCI.

That apait, the Couit also answeieu the puiely acauemic question as to whethei the
afoiementioneu Clauses (af), (ag) anu (ah) can sustain the impugneu Rules even on the
assumption that such an exeicise otheiwise iemains a peimissible one. It helu that:
i. Clause (af) has nothing to uo with the impugneu Rules.
ii. Clause (ag) alloweu the BCI only to auu to the categoiy of eligible peisons foi
eniolment who woulu have otheiwise iemaineu outsiue the sweep of the statutoiy
scheme of eligibility foi eniolment as laiu uown by Section 24(1), anu it uiu not
contemplate any powei to cuitail the existing eligibility of applicants foi eniolment
as auvocates.
iii. Clause (ah) ueals with a situation which is post eniolment of an auvocate anu uoes
not ueal with pie-eniolment situation foi a canuiuate seeking eniolment, as is the
case with the impugneu Rules.

\L*84;*"T45*467*/K4KGK>;F*&5:675:6K*
Although the Supieme Couit stiuck uown the BCI iules, it stiongly suppoiteu the neeu foi
such a bai exam to impiove the quality of the Bai. It expiessly enuoiseu the
iecommenuations of the Ahmaui Committee anu iefeiieu to the "ciying neeu foi impioving
the stanuaius of legal euucation", anu the "lauuable object" behinu the impugneu iules.
48

The Couit iecommenueu amenument of the Act to vest the BCI with suitable poweis so as
to give effect to the Ahmaui Committee's iecommenuations.
49

In view of the piactices in most othei nations of the woilu, the iecommenuations of the
Ahmaui Committee, the Law Commission anu the Supieme Couit's obseivations in Suueei,
we must woik towaius institutionalizing a bai exam. Bowevei, the Act neeus to be
amenueu to empowei the BCI to conuuct entiance examinations. The iespective State Bai
Councils shoulu be chaigeu with the uuty of actually conuucting the Bai examination, while
the BCI has the geneial iesponsibility of monitoiing that the eniolment exeicise is
unueitaken by the State Bai Councils conceineu in a unifoim mannei. Besiues the othei
auvantages stateu above, a Bai examination as pioposeu heie woulu be a convenient
gateway foi stuuents who have obtaineu law uegiees fiom othei countiies but wish to
piactise law in Inuia. 0f couise, as to whethei oi not Inuia wishes to make its legal system

48
Supra note 15 at para. 32.
49
Ibid.
open in this mannei is a mattei of anothei uebate altogethei anu goes beyonu the scope of
this note.
It is inteiesting to note that initially, the Inuian Auvocates Act iequiieu holueis of law
uegiees who wisheu to entei piactice to complete a couise in piactical tiaining anu also
pass an examination aftei they hau secuieu a law uegiee.
Su
This was in confoimity with
what hau been suggesteu in the 14
th
Law Commission Repoit. But, in 197S, this piovision
was ueleteu by way of amenument, anu since then, a law giauuate fiom a iecognizeu
0niveisity coulu uiiectly enioll as a lawyei. The ieasons foi this aie founu in paiagiaph
(iii) of the statement of objects anu ieasons foi intiouucing the afoiesaiu (Amenument) Bill
of 197u, which ieaus as below:
Pie-eniolment tiaining - The Bai Council of Inuia has ueciueu that in futuie a
uegiee in Law can be obtaineu only aftei unueigoing a thiee-yeai couise of
stuuy in Law aftei giauuation as a iesult of which the age of entiy into the
legal piofession becomes much highei than the age of entiy in othei
piofessions. It is, theiefoie, felt that aftei a thiee- yeai couise in Law in a
0niveisity it is not necessaiy to ietain the statutoiy piovision in the Act
iequiiing a fuithei examination oi piactical tiaining.

In this uay anu age, paiity in the age of those enteiing uiveise piofessions cannot be ieason
enough to holu back fiom instituting an efficient mechanism foi iegulating the quality of
talent enteiing the legal piofession. In fact, a Bai exam foims a significant component of
the entiy baiiiei in seveial key juiisuictions as outlineu below:
]L*84;*"T459.*&*,>5R4;4K@P:*=:;9R:JK@P:*
In the $6@K:7* /K4K:9, aumission to the Bai is peimission gianteu by a paiticulai couit
system to a lawyei to piactise law in that system. Each 0.S. state sets its own iules foi Bai
aumission. ueneially, aumission to the Bai iequiies a canuiuate to fiist eain a }uiis Boctoi
uegiee fiom a law school appioveu by the state in which the canuiuate wants to piactise
(notable exceptions incluue the State of Califoinia). Seconuly, in most 0niteu States
juiisuictions, the canuiuate must also pass the Nultistate Piofessional Responsibility
Examination ("0=!""), an examination coveiing the piofessional iesponsibility iules
goveining lawyeis. This test is not auministeieu at the same time as any 0.S. Bai
examination. Nost canuiuates take the NPRE while still in law school, anu some states
specifically iequiie that a canuiuate pass the NPRE befoie being alloweu to sit foi the Bai
examination. Thiiuly, the canuiuate must pass a state-auministeieu Bai examination which
usually consists of seveial paits auministeieu ovei two oi thiee uays. Typically, theie is

50
Section 24(1)(d) of the originally enacted Advocates Act, 1961.
also a chaiactei anu fitness evaluation, along with a backgiounu check. But the Ameiican
legal system is unusual in that, with few exceptions, it has no foimal appienticeship oi
clinical tiaining iequiiements between the peiiou of acauemic legal tiaining anu the Bai
examination, oi even aftei the Bai examination.
In #:;546F, to be authoiizeu to piactise law as a lawyei (S&364+/$>/04), one must be a
membei of a local Bai association. The iequiiements foi membeiship in a local Bai
association incluue an unueigiauuate law uegiee (S&364+>%++&$+36/:4 oi Biplom-}uiist,
which iequiies about foui anu a half yeais anu incluues the Fiist State Exam), a two yeai
appienticeship, anu the passing of the _29%+4%+36&+ B4//4+&L/7&$ (Seconu State Exam).
In "6NA467*467*^4A:9, the Bai vocational Couise is a giauuate couise that is completeu by
those wishing to be calleu to the Bai, i.e. to piactise as a baiiistei. The couise biiuges the
gap between acauemic stuuy anu the piactical woik of a baiiistei by teaching subjects with
which a piactising baiiistei will neeu to be familiai with. Canuiuates successfully
completing the couise go on to uo a compulsoiy one-yeai long pupillage. This is similai to
an appienticeship wheie stuuents builu on what they have leaint uuiing the Bai vocational
Couise by combining it with piactical woik expeiience in a set of baiiisteis' chambeis.
_L*&AK:;64K@P:9*K>*K3:*84;*"T45*
Bowevei, an amenument as pioposeu above is likely to take time. We theiefoie consiuei
some alteinatives within the existing statutoiy poweis that might go some way towaius
impioving the quality of the Bai.
In view of the limitations laiu uown in Suueei,! any alteinative measuie to impiove the
quality of the Bai (a) must be in puisuance of one oi moie of the BCI's statutoiily
uelineateu functions; (b) must not specify auuitional conuitions of eniolment to what is
alieauy laiu uown in Section 24; (c) must be within the BCI's geneial iule-making
competence unuei Section 49. Keeping these limitations in minu, the BCI may consiuei
intiouucing an examination which all auvocates aie compulsoiily iequiieu to wiite within
one yeai of theii eniolment. Such a post-eniolment iequiiement, unlike a pie-eniolment
iequiiement, coulu be tailoieu in such a way as to iemain within the statutoiy limits of the
BCI's competence.

An #;%4&9!obseivation maue by the Couit in B21&&9 also seems to suppoit such a move:
We may also mention that till the Pailiament steps in to make suitable statutoiy
amenuments in the Act foi pioviuing pie-eniolment tiaining to piospective
auvocates seeking eniolment unuei the Act, the Bai Council of Inuia by way of an
inteiim measuie can also consiuei the feasibility of making suitable iules
pioviuing foi in-piactice tiaining to be maue available to eniolleu auvocates.
Such an exeicise may then not fall foul on the touchstone of Section 49(1)(ah).
The impugneu iules can be suitably ie-enacteu by ueleting the conuition of pie-
eniolment tiaining to auvocates anu insteau of tieating them to be a hybiiu class
of tiainee auvocates with limiteu iight of auuience in couits, may pioviue in-
piactice tiaining to alieauy eniolleu auvocates at least foi the fiist yeai of theii
piactice as piofessionals.

It must of couise be shown that the pioposeu iule is foi fiuctifying anu effectively
uischaiging one oi moie of the BCI's statutoiy functions. To this enu, the function best
suiteu foi the puipose seems to be that laiu uown in Section 7(1)(b), namely "to lay uown
stanuaius of piofessional conuuct anu etiquette foi auvances."

Cleaily, the pioposeu iule will not fall foul of Section 24 since it uoes not place any
iestiictions on eligibility foi eniolment. Finally, the authoiity foi fiaming the pioposeu iule
may be tiaceu geneially to Section 49(1) oi specifically to Clause (ah) theieof.

The pioposeu Rules must, of couise, also lay uown the consequences foi failing to pass the
examination. The most uiastic consequence foi failing to pass the examination woulu be
iemoval fiom the iolls. Bowevei, this may be statutoiily pioblematic, since the geneial
conuitions unuei which an auvocate may be iemoveu fiom the iolls aie set foith in the Act.
A seconu alteinative woulu be iestiiction of auvocate's iight to piactice unuei Section
49(1)(ah). In othei woius, while the auvocate conceineu woulu iemain on the iolls, he
woulu not be entitleu to piactice at all, oi to uischaige only a limiteu class of functions
when appeaiing in Couit. A thiiu alteinative woulu be to simply have a piovision wheieby
an auvocate who successfully cleais the examination is piesenteu with a ceitificate to that
effect. An auvocate who faileu to cleai the examination woulu not technically be iestiicteu
in the exeicise of his iight to piactice. Bowevei, it can be conceiveu that the absence of
such ceitification woulu unueimine an auvocate's cieuibility as a competent piofessional in
the eyes of clients oi the legal fiateinity at laige. Regulation coulu theieby be achieveu
thiough a foim of accieuitation anu maiket foices, as opposeu to legal iestiictions on the
iight to piactice.

A few cautionaiy woius aie also in oiuei with iespect to the pioposeu iules. Fiistly, the
iules must be fiameu in such a way as to ensuie that no new class of auvocates aie cieateu,
othei than "senioi auvocates" anu "othei auvocates" as laiu uown in Section 17 of the Act.
Suueei is veiy cleai on the point that no new class of auvocates may be cieateu by any
iules fiameu by the BCI. Seconuly, as mentioneu eailiei, the pioposeu iule must be such as
to satisfy the Couit, in case the iules aie challengeu, that they aie foi fiuctifying anu
effectively uischaiging one oi moie of the BCI's statutoiy functions. We have suggesteu
heie that the function best suiteu foi the puipose is that laiu uown in Section 7(1)(b);
howevei, it woulu still be open to uebate whethei "stanuaius of piofessional conuuct"
incluue piofessional competence which is testeu unuei the pioposeu examination. Fuithei
caution is auvisable because post-eniolment examination as suggesteu heie is manifestly a
ciicumvention mechanism wheieby quality contiol can be intiouuceu without the
concomitant complications of statutoiy amenument, anu the Couit in Suueei has alieauy
expiesseu uisappioval of iules which seek to biing about changes "almost by back uooi."

`L*&RR;:6K@J:93@R*
Noie iecently, the Law Commission has emphasizeu that "theie is a gieat uiffeience
between leaining about the skills in the college cuiiiculum anu witnessing the actual
piesentation of skills in couit,"
S1
anu gone on to iecommenu ieintiouuction of the
appienticeship anu the Bai examination.
S2
It noteu that in most othei countiies, a peiiou of
tiaining oi appienticeship oi pupilage anu the passing of Bai examination aie manuatoiy
befoie a stuuent enteis into the legal piofession.
SS

Notwithstanuing the iecommenuations of the Ahmaui Committee, the Law Commission
anu the #;%4&9! of the Supieme Couit in Suueei, it is submitteu that the piesent situation
uoes not call foi the intiouuction of compulsoiy appienticeship. The cuiiiculum piesciibeu
by the BCI alieauy incluues seveial couises aimeu at equipping law stuuents with piactical
anu clinical skills.
S4
Anu it may be fai bettei to focus on incluuing a iobust "clinical"
tiaining component within the geneial legal euucation cuiiiculum.
In auuition, giauuates who wish to join the Bai, by convention, unueigo an initial peiiou of
appienticeship unuei a Senioi Auvocate. In view of these factois, it is submitteu that
ieintiouucing compulsoiy appienticeship woulu tenu towaius ovei-iegulation anu seive
no useful puipose.
(((L*'-^&!+/*/$8/'&)'(["*!"2-!0*-2*%"#&%*"+$,&'(-).*&)*()+"=")+")'*
!"#$%&'-!U*

51
Supra note 22 at para 12.15.
52
Ibid at para 12.16, 12.23.
53
Ibid at para. 12.12.
54
Goswami, Post-Enrolment Training of Advocates, Indian Bar Review (1999) Vol 26(2), p. 23 at 26-28.
uiven the vaiious pioblems associateu with the cuiient iegulatoiy fiamewoik foi legal
euucation, the most optimal solution woulu be an inuepenuent iegulatoi focuseu on legal
euucation. *
&L*/>5:*!:J>55:674K@>69*?>;*4*/:R4;4K:C*(67:R:67:6K*!:NGA4K>;*
As fai back as 1964, the uajenuiagaukai Committee hau iecommenueu the cieation of a
statutoiy bouy calleu the Council of Legal Euucation which coulu be given supeivisoiy
contiol ovei all aspects - theoietical, piactical anu inciuental - of legal euucation in the
countiy. The Committee was of the opinion that the Council shoulu be constituteu on a
high-powei basis anu be composeu of juuges, law teacheis, membeis of the Bai, anu
iepiesentatives of inuustiy oi othei fielus which woulu have an inteiest in law. The
Committee uiu not elaboiate on the uetails of the constitution of the Council oi on its
poweis, but felt that the constitution of such a Council by Pailiament woulu facilitate the
piogiess of legal euucation along healthy lines.
SS
Similai suggestions have been maue
seveial times ovei the yeais.
S6

The Fiist National Consultation Confeience of Beaus of Legal Euucational Institutions in its
Biaft Repoit has also iecommenueu that an All Inuia Legal Euucation Council be set up on
the mouel of AICTE foi technical euucation, anu the BCI's iole be limiteu only to iegulating
entiy into the legal piofession anu maintenance of piofessional stanuaius iathei than foi
legal euucation.
S7

Likewise, the iecent NKC Repoit asseits that the BCI has neithei the powei unuei the Act,
noi the expeitise to meet the challenges of a globalizeu woilu. It theiefoie iecommenus the
constitution of a new iegulatoiy mechanism to ueal with all aspects of legal euucation.
S8

To put the iecommenuations auvanceu in the NKC Repoit into context, a biief uiscussion
about the pioposeu Inuepenuent Regulatoiy Authoiity foi Bighei Euucation ("(!&1"") is
necessaiy. The constitution of the IRABE has been pioposeu in the National Knowleuge
Commission's Repoit to the Nation (2uu6-u7),
S9
the aim being to inciease the supply of
goou institutions anu to fostei accountability in those institutions. Theie aie five functions
that iegulatois commonly peifoim with iespect to highei euucation: (1) Entiy: licence to
giant uegiees. (2) Accieuitation: quality benchmaiking. (S) Bisbuisement of public funus.

55
Report of the Committee on the Reorganisation of Legal Education in the University of Delhi, (1964).
56
See e.g. Rao, Legal Education needs immediate Reform, Indian Bar Review (1996) Vol 23(2), p. 17-24 at 22.
57
Supra note 9 at p. 10.
58
Supra note 12 at paras. 3.13.1 - 3.13.2.
59
Available at http://www.knowledgecommission.gov.in/downloads/report2009/eng/report09.pdf (last visited: 28
July 2009).
(4) Access: fees oi affiimative action. (S) Licence: to piactise piofession. At piesent, all but
the fifth function aie being caiiieu out by the 0uC. The IRABE has been envisioneu so as to
sepaiate these functions. The pioposeu IRABE woulu be iesponsible foi setting the ciiteiia
anu ueciuing on entiy, anu woulu license agencies to take caie of accieuitation. The iole of
the 0uC woulu be limiteu to uisbuising public funus.
6u

The iegulatoi envisioneu in the NKC Repoit is a Stanuing Committee on Legal Euucation
which is unuei the aegis of the IRABE, anu whose iecommenuations will be taken into
account by the IRABE. The NKC Repoit goes on to iecommenu the constitution of the
pioposeu Stanuing Committee, anu the confeiment of wiue poweis to the saiu Committee,
incluuing the powei to iecommenu bioau stanuaius of legal euucation, conuitions foi
aumission of stuuents anu conuuct of entiance examinations in each State, piesciibing the
cuiiiculum anu the syllabus, qualifications anu expeiience of law teacheis anu numbei of
teaching houis, conuitions foi affiliation anu iecognition of law schools by the univeisities,
attenuance iequiiements foi stuuents, inspection of law schools anu theii accieuitation,
etc.
61
While the iecommenuations of the BCI with iegaiu to maintenance of minimum
stanuaius foi the puipose of piactising in couits woulu be binuing on the new iegulatoi,
the uiiectives of the new iegulatoiy mechanism woulu be tieateu as binuing on the law
schools, the 0niveisities anu on the 0nion anu State uoveinments.
*
8L*"TJAG9@>6*>?*K3:*8,(U*
The Law Commission in its 184
th
Repoit iejecteu the suggestions foi uivesting the BCI of its
poweis foi legal euucation, anu went on to say:
62

But, we feel that if 'legal euucation' is kept totally out of the puiview of the
BCI anu its iole is limiteu only to aumission to piofession anu uiscipline of
lawyeis, it may not be able to piesciibe a uefinite couise of legal euucation
which can meet the neeus of the Bai. As at piesent, the Law Commission feels
that theie aie piactical uifficulties in the way of the suggestion to excluue the
BCI totally fiom legal euucation. Such a uecision cannot be taken without
consulting the Bai anu the }uuiciaiy.

The Law Commission's suggestions unuoubteuly have some meiit. The BCI has been
caiiying out iegulatoiy functions in the spheie of legal euucation foi seveial uecaues, anu
as such is familiai with the neeus anu uemanus of the sectoi. The ueficiencies that the BCI

60
Ibid at p. 71.
61
Supra note 12 at paras. 3.13.3 - 3.13.5.
62
Supra note 22 at para 3.6.
cuiiently suffeis fiom may possibly be iectifieu by making piovision foi effective
consultation with the faculty. Fuitheimoie, it is a bouy which enjoys consiueiable iespect
anu authoiity in the legal inuustiy.*
Bowevei, theie aie valiu policy objections in the way of gianting such a wiue iole to the
BCI. The BCI's "uispiopoitionately laige iole in ueteimining policy issues in legal
euucation," it has been saiu, gives iise to the impiession that the sole objective of legal
euucation is to piepaie law piactitioneis.
6S
Even befoie the Auvocates Act hau been
foimally enacteu, anu was still in the piepaiatoiy stages, the Inuian Law Teacheis'
Association expiesseu concein about the "unnecessaiy anu unhealthy inteifeience with the
autonomous natuie of the 0niveisities."
64
It was aigueu:
6S


A uistinction shoulu be maue between an acauemic uegiee anu a puiely
piofessional couise. The Bai Council may insist on ceitain subjects as an
auuitional qualification foi an auvocate. But in no countiy that we know of
has it evei been suggesteu that a piofessional bouy like the Bai Council
shoulu uictate to the 0niveisities as to what they shoulu oi shoulu not teach.
|.j So long as the Bai Council insists on ceitain minimum stanuaius, it may
be left to the 0niveisities to ueciue the subjects of a Begiee couise.
If anything, this uistinction is even moie ielevant touay. At the time when the Act was
fiameu, the concept was that the law schools giauuates woulu mostly join the Bai, while a
few might entei the acauemic stieam. Accoiuingly, the Act was enacteu to piesciibe
minimum stanuaius foi entiy into piofessional piactice. But especially aftei libeialization,
the entiie concept of legal euucation has unueigone a sea change. Touay, legal euucation
has to meet not only the iequiiements of the Bai, but the new neeus of tiaue, commeice
anu inuustiy, anu also the iequiiements of globalization.
66
The Law Commission too has
noteu the new challenges biought foith by globalisation, piivatization anu ueiegulation,
the emeigence of highly specializeu aieas of law, anu the paiauigm shifts in the veiy natuie
of law, legal institutions anu law piactice.
67
Nembeis of the BCI who aie piactising lawyeis
anu who get electeu to the Bai Council uo not necessaiily have the expeit knowleuge oi
expeiience foi ueciuing the iequiiements of legal euucation foi puiposes othei than

63
Supra note 10 at 20.
64
Editorial, The Journal of the Indian Law Teachers Association, Vol. 2 (1959), p. 1-3 at 2-3.
65
Ibid.
66
Supra note 12 at para. 3.3.1. The Report goes on to enumerate several types of legal education to which the BCIs
role ought not and does not extend, viz. the type which prepares students to become researchers and teachers, the
type which deals exclusively with academic subjects of substantive law, the type which deals with public legal
education or paralegal education, the type that prepares law graduates to deal with legal, regulatory and ethical
issues in active sectors of domestic and international business and industry, and finally, the type which professionals
in engineering, medicine, management and social work may require.
67
Supra note 22, at p. 58-59.
piactice in the couits.
68
In view of the afoiementioneu consiueiations, it is submitteu that a
stanuing committee unuei the IRABE as pioposeu in the NKC Repoit woulu be best
equippeu to iegulate legal euucation. The iesponsibility of gianting a license to piactise the
piofession woulu, of couise, iemain with the BCI. The BCI's iegulatoiy poweis shoulu be
limiteu to only that aspect of legal euucation that has an intiinsic nexus to eniolment in the
Bai anu the piactice of law befoie couits. uiven that the quality of lawyeis in the countiy is
often appalling anu it is neai impossible to iegulate all law schools in a compiehensive
mannei, a national level bai exam (of the soit followeu in the 0SA anu in }apan) may be
intiouuceu. This exam coulu be within the exclusive juiisuiction of the Bai Council. Anu this
is a much bettei mechanism than inspection, a mechanism that has come to be associateu
with inefficiency, high costs anu abuse, as explaineu below.
,>6JAG9@>6*
The iegulatoiy stiuctuie aiounu legal euucation in Inuia leaves much to be uesiieu.
Paiticulaily in this "globaliseu" uay anu age, when law has expanueu beyonu its naiiow
shackles of uoctiinal black lettei law at the Bai to acquiie a moie "intei uisciplinaiy" hue.
Anu the object of legal euucation is not meiely to tiain lawyeis foi the bai, but to cieate
socially sensitive inuiviuuals who aie committeu to liquiuating the multifaiious societal
inequities aiounu them. To this extent, we fiist piopose that theie must be much moie
"acauemic" input into the piocess of uesigning legal euucation cuiiicula.

Seconuly, the Bai Council accieuitation piocess is flaweu anu aibitiaiy; iathei than going
about tiying to bettei this accieuitation piocess by moie effective (anu costly) monitoiing
mechanisms, we piopose an All Inuia Bai Exam. Such a iecommenuation has been maue
eailiei, most notably by the }ustice Ahmaui committee. Bowevei, such a iefoim cannot be
effectuateu without statutoiy amenument. Till such time, the BCI may consiuei the
intiouuction of post-eniolment quality contiol mechanism which woulu go some way in
achieving the uesiieu goals, while iemaining within the iulemaking competence of the BCI.

4,&#$0%#)'1')*++56$/"#$%&'()'%*+$&#),--#(.*/',(0$-*.#$'($/"'0$%*%#&$*&#$*0$1,++,203$
!
-&./0! &123/4%#$! 4#1/5! #2.64! 4#! &$3#78/++! 7236! 7#9&! 46/$! 7&9&05! 49/%$%$.! +421&$4+!
:#9! 46&! ;/9<! )$1&&1=! 46&! /%7! #2.64! 4#! ;&! 4#! 39&/4&! /$! &::&34%*&! +#3%/0! &$.%$&&9! >6#! %+!
+#3%/005!+&$+%4%*&!/$1!2+&+!46&!0/>!%$!759%/1!>/5+!4#!6&08!;&44&9!+#3%&45<!!
?6&! "@)! 6/+! $#! 0&./0A3#$+4%424%#$/0! /246#9%45! 4#! 9&.20/4&! 46&! :200! +8&34927! #:! 0&./0!
&123/4%#$=!%$1&8&$1&$4!#:!46&!,$%*&9+%4%&+<!)$!:/34=!B&34%#$!CDEFD6F!#:!46&!G1*#3/4&+!G34!

68
Supra note 12at para. 3.4.6.
30&/905! 7&$4%#$+! 46/4! 46&! "@) is to lay uown stanuaius of legal euucation %$!
3#$+204/4%#$! >%46 the 0niveisities in Inuia impaiting such euucation anu the State
Bai Councils.!!
?6&9&:#9&! "@)! +6#201! 7/H&! /889#89%/4&! 36/$.&+! %$! 46&! 3#$+4%424%#$! #:! %4+! -&./0!
I123/4%#$! @#77%44&&! +#! 46/4=! %$! 0/5%$.! 1#>$! +4/$1/91+! #:! 0&./0! &123/4%#$=! &::&34%*&!
3#$+204/4%#$!>%46!46&!,$%*&9+%4%&+!4/H&+!80/3&=!/+!7/$1/4&1!;5!46&!G1*#3/4&+!G34<!J#9&!
/3/1&7%3+!$&&1!4#!:#97!8/94!#:!46&!0&./0!&123/4%#$!3#77%44&&!>%46%$!46&!"/9!@#2$3%0<!
G$! /00K)$1%/! "/9! I$49/$3&! IL/7%$/4%#$! +6#201! ;&! %$49#123&1! /+! /! M2/0%45K3#$49#0!
7&36/$%+7=! %$+4&/1! #:! 46&! &L%+4%$.! /339&1%4/4%#$! +5+4&7! >6%36! %+! 8/4&$405! :0/>&1=!
%$&::&34%*&=! 3#+405! /$1! +2;N&34! 4#! /;2+&<! )4! >%00! $#4! #$05! &$+29&! /! M2/0%4/4%*&! 36&3H! #$!
46&! $27;&9! #:! 0/>5&9+! &$4&9%$.! 46&! "/9=! ;24! >#201! /0+#! .%*&! 46&! "/9! @#2$3%0! +3#8&! 4#!
9&.20/4&!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!/!7#9&!9#;2+4!7/$$&9<!!
O#>&*&9=!4%00!+236!4%7&!/+!/!+4/424#95!/7&$17&$4!%$!46%+!9&./91!3#7&+!/;#24=!46&!"@)!
7/5! 3#$+%1&9! 46&! %$49#1234%#$! #:! 8#+4K&$9#07&$4! M2/0%45! 3#$49#0! 7&36/$%+7! >6%36!
>#201! .#! +#7&! >/5! %$! /36%&*%$.! 46&! 1&+%9&1! .#/0+=! >6%0&! 9&7/%$%$.! >%46%$! 46&!
920&7/H%$.!3#78&4&$3&!#:!46&!"@)<!
G046#2.6!/!3#7820+#95!;/9!&L/7!7/H&+!:#9!/$!#84%7/0!9&.20/4#95!7&/+29&=!>&!1#!$#4!
+288#94! /! 3#99&+8#$1%$.! /889&$4%3&+6%8! +5+4&7! 46/4! 6/1! ;&&$! %$+4%424&1! ;5! 46&! "/9!
@#2$3%0!%$!EPPQ!/$1!46&9&/:4&9!+4923H!1#>$!/+!2$3#$+4%424%#$/0!;5!46&!B289&7&!@#294!
%$! 46&! R! B216&&9! 3/+&<! '#9! #$&=! +236! /! 9&M2%9&7&$4! 7/5! ;&! 1%::%3204! 4#! 7#$%4#9! :#9!
&::&34%*&! 3#780%/$3&<! B&3#$105=! .%*&$! 46&! )$1%/$! 89/34%3&! #:! %$:#97/0! 424&0/.&! ;5!
+&$%#9+=!3#$*&94%$.!46%+!4#!/!7/$1/4#95!#;0%./4%#$!7/5!;&!2$$&3&++/95<!!
G+! /! 7#9&! +2;+4/$4%*&! 8#0%35! 7&/+29&=! >&! 9&3#77&$1! /! 7#9&! 46#9#2.6! #*&96/20! #:!
46&!89&+&$4!9&.20/4#95!+4923429&!8&94/%$%$.!4#!0&./0!&123/4%#$!%$!)$1%/<!?6&!"@)!8#>&9+!
+6#201! #$05! &L4&$1! 4#! 9&.20/4%$.! 46/4! /+8&34! #:! 0&./0! &123/4%#$! 46/4! %+! %$49%$+%3/005!
3#$$&34&1! >%46! 46&! 89/34%3&! #:! 0/>! /4! 46&! "/9<! B#7&! #:! 46&! 9&.20/4#95! :2$34%#$+! 46/4!
/9&!89&+&$405!;&%$.!8&9:#97&1!;5!46&!"@)=!/$1!>6%36!1#!$#4!9&0/4&!1%9&3405!4#!89/34%3&!
/4!46&!"/9!+6#201!;&!1&*#0*&1!4#!/$#46&9!/246#9%45<!?6%+!/246#9%45!+6#201!%1&/005!;&!/!
+4/$1%$.! 3#77%44&&! #$! 0&./0! &123/4%#$! 2$1&9! 46&! )SGOI! /+! 89#8#+&1! ;5! 46&! TU@<!
O#>&*&9=!46%+!+2..&+4%#$!%+!;&5#$1!46&!+3#8&!:#9!46&!89&+&$4!3/+&!;&%$.!1&3%1&1!;5!46&!
@#294=! /+! 46%+! %$*#0*&+! +4/424#95! /7&$17&$4+<! G$1! 46&! 3#294! 7/5! /4! ;&+4=! 9&3#77&$1!
+236!/7&$17&$4+!4#!46&!V/90%/7&$4<!