white black legal international law journal ISSN: 2581-8503

Peer-Reviewed Journal | Indexed at Manupatra, HeinOnline, Google Scholar & ROAD




Authored By - J.Nissha



Legal knowledge is a duty because ignorance of the law is not an excuse and because the law assumes that everyone knows it. Knowledge is a social necessity. Mainstream education that focuses on the study of law is known as legal education. It teaches students how to use the law, analyze it, and criticize the legal profession. It emphasizes individual liberty, social progress, solidarity, and enforcing the rule of law.


A prerequisite for practicing lawyers of high quality is the development of high-quality legal education. Justice and liberty are protected and upheld by the law. Legal education's primary objective is to produce socially conscious lawyers. Legal education is now viewed as a tool for social change in the law.


KEY WORDS: Legal Education, Social Design, Social challenges, Development of the society



Knowledge is the light that shuns the darkness of ignorance, and education is the foundation of knowledge. Legal education is also a part of that system because it sheds light on the inner self, making the distinctions between right and wrong, just and unjust, equal and unequal, and legal and illegal crystal clear. Law, legal education, and development have become intertwined concepts in contemporary developing societies that are struggling to develop into social welfare states and are seeking to ameliorate the socio-economic condition of the people through peaceful means[1]. This education is what creates an organized and civilized society. India is the same way. In a developing nation like India, it is essential for legal education to produce lawyers with a social conscience. Modern legal education, on the other hand, is not just about producing practicing lawyers. Its impact is felt in every aspect of human life, and its scope and ambit have expanded. Legal education can be thought of as an instrument for social design, just like the law is a tool for social engineering.

Methodologies and institutional mechanisms for planning and decision-making, as well as recurring and continuing education, have been the focus of recent legal research; expanding opportunities for all by providing poor people with legal aid and clinical legal education; the utilization of cutting-edge technologies, the prices and sources of funding for various programs like Lok Adalat, legal literacy drives, and pre-litigation conciliations; institutional research, curriculum; the management and accountability of legal education institutions. The use of law-trained individuals and the importance of law roles are now emphasized in university education; the work that lawyers do, their socioeconomic background, and their ideologies.


An effective legal profession and a sound and well-organized judicial system are built on legal education. In essence, legal education is a multidisciplinary and multipurpose education that can cultivate the human resources and ideals necessary to strengthen the legal system. A lawyer with this kind of education could make much more positive contributions to social change and national development.


The legal profession and legal education in India lacked a rational and practical approach to the issues pertaining to law and order. Legal education must be used as a vehicle for economic and social change in a developing society, which necessitates a deeper awareness on the part of law teachers, judges, and educated professional lawyers. Law, legal education, and development have become intertwined concepts in contemporary developing societies that struggle to peacefully improve people's socioeconomic conditions. As a result, the primary goal of legal education in India is to cultivate socially conscious layers.


Law is intended to promote social progress and is an active instrument of social engineering. The rule of law is an essential component in the administration of justice, and the judiciary is one of the fundamental pillars of democracy. Only the best legal education can ensure the nation's judiciary's independence, effectiveness, and integrity.


The highest levels of the legal profession provide a lot of intellectual stimulation and help people develop their ability to absorb and analyze information. Being called upon to defend life, liberty, and other fundamental rights is no small service. The most crucial aspect for safeguarding and developing the Constitution's democratic and social justice principles is high-quality legal education. Only high-quality legal education can produce sensitive and responsive lawyers. Only effective legal education can ensure the profession's success and healthy growth. Therefore, it is the solemn responsibility of the government, Bar Councils, and Bar Associations to promote legal education in a significant and significant way.


The social awareness of the significance of law is credited with advancing civilization in any society. If the history of our own independence movement is written objectively, more pages will be devoted to lawyers than to supporters of any other profession. The idea that practicing law is a noble profession and that members of the legal profession enjoy a very high status is widely held[2]. Since law is the backbone of every society or nation, public legal education is essential. In addition to producing law-abiding citizens, legal education also produces brilliant academicians, innovative judges, remarkable lawyers, and awe-inspiring jurists. The goal of legal education ought to be the formation of these four groups of men, since law is a tool for social change and economic progress and serves as a catalyst for society's expansion.


Legal education in India typically refers to the education of lawyers prior to entry into practice. The policy of legal education ought to be shaped in accordance with the rapid changes that are taking place in contemporary society as a result of scientific and technological advancements, particularly the expansion of software technology[3]. Traditional Indian universities provide legal education[4].

The specialized law schools and universities only after an undergraduate degree or an integrated degree has been earned. The society's economic, social, and political structure is the impetus for legal education. Legal education is a human science that provides fundamental philosophies, ideologies, critiques, and tools for creating and maintaining a just society in addition to skills, techniques, and competences[5].



Legal education is a human science that provides the fundamental philosophies, ideologies, critiques, and instrumentalities all aimed at the creation and maintenance of a just society[6]. It provides opportunities for the articulation of theories of a just society and teaches us that articulation must be grounded in historical realities in order to bring the truth of the workings of the legal system to the forefront. Because of its dynamic role in shaping and envisioning the country's legal system, it is a topic of great importance because it helps a sovereign, socialist, secular, democratic republic achieve its cherished goals of equality, justice, and fraternity[7].

The law commission also defines legal education as a science that teaches students about specific legal principles and provisions to prepare them for careers in the legal field[8]. According to Blackstone, legal education aims to impart knowledge of the country as part of the necessary culture of a gentleman, nobleman, and common man engaged in a learned profession[9]. The Encyclopedia of Education defines legal education as a skill for human knowledge that is universally relevant to the lawyer's art and that deserves special attention in educational institutions.



Legal education is not just about producing competent lawyers. The term "professional lawyer" encompasses all lawyers who have been trained in law and whose employment or services are either directly or indirectly dependent on their degrees in law. This includes litigating lawyers who argue in court.


Not only should legal education aim to produce competent lawyers, but also to cultivate law-abiding citizens with an understanding of human rights and values; who are able to help humanity in a variety of ways, such as administrators, teachers of the law, jurists, judges, industrial entrepreneurs, arbitrators, and so on. The goal of legal education should be to give law students professional skills and legal techniques.


The various objectives of legal education have been outlined in terms of their relevance and context by a variety of organizations, including academic institutions and statutory authorities[10].

The Harvard Law School committee on legal education emphasizes a law school's dual function.

  1. To prepare men for the legal profession and
  2. To provide a center where scholars can contribute to a better understanding of government and law and creatively contribute to their development and improvement.

The University of Toronto's Mr. Dean Wright suggested three goals for a law school.

  1. Training in the qualities that should be found in legal practitioners;
  2. Training that would train a man not only to solve problems for individual clients but also for the society in which he lives; and
  3. Serving as a center for research, criticism, and contributing to a better understanding of the laws that hold societies together

In his address to the Society of Public Teachers of Law, Lord Denning outlined three goals for legal education:

a) to demonstrate the development of legal norms, their motivations, and the connection between legal and social history;

b) to deduce the guiding principles of current norms; and

c) to indicate the best path forward.

In his observations on legal education in a modern civilized society, Dr. Mohammad Farogh wants to include the following goals and objectives[11]:

(1) to familiarize students with the substantive and procedural operative legal rules;

(2) to provide students with sufficient experience to apply these rules;

(3) to provide students with sufficient knowledge of the country's legal system's historical and sociological background.

(4) Students should be encouraged to participate in discussions, seminars, and challenge the very premise of legal concepts and their applications in order to provide them with some knowledge of the other legal systems in the world so that they do not find themselves at a complete loss when it comes to adopting a comparative approach.


The fundamental philosophies and ideologies for creating and maintaining a just society[12] should be imparted through legal education, which must educate society to identify its problems, ensure social and economic justice through the rule of law, and eradicate injustice, poverty, corruption, and nepotism. Legal education promotes human sensibility enhancement and instills a sense of protecting human liberty and equality before the law. The objectives of the legal education curriculum should be considered.


According to Andrew J. Pirie, the steps of systematic instructional design may include the following:

(1) Performance Analysis places an emphasis on determining the instructional objectives that are required by those who receive legal education. It can be used to determine whether there is a significant difference between what a person is already able to do and what they are supposed to be able to do, and if there is a significant difference, whether they should receive instruction or take another approach. What the student will learn is the objective.

(2) Task analysis is a sincere effort to determine precisely what the student needs to know or do to reach the objective. It is a precise explanation of what the competent worker does or is expected to do when performing their duties.

(3) A method for determining the steps a person must take to reach a goal is outlined in skill analysis. It requires intellectual, psychomotor, or information skills. Each of these identified steps is broken down into its component parts using the skill analysis. However, the skills analysis becomes more complicated when the steps involve higher-level intellectual skills like application, analysis, synthesis, or evaluation. Depending on the task, skills analysis may require the creation of a much longer list of required behaviors.

(4) The stage of writing performance analysis is when both the instructor and the student can comprehend what a person needs to know or be able to do in order to complete a task.



The goals of legal education may be numerous for India, a democratically developing nation. These have been listed all over the world as follows:

1. Goals for Socialization: the application of education to the formation of perceptions and comprehensions of the local and global environment; to comprehend the issues facing one's society; to influence one's beliefs and values.

2. Personnel for the Goals: the utilization of the entire educational system to produce the kinds of knowledge and skills required for societal tasks.

3. Goals for this opportunity: the use of education to increase opportunities and social mobility, particularly for groups that may have been disadvantaged or oppressed in the past.

4. Goals of the study: the development of research that will benefit society and education by making use of educational facilities.

5. Goals for administration: the application of planning to the management of institutions; the application of more sophisticated approaches to program budgeting, management, and evaluation.



The profession that is practiced in courts, law teaching, law research, administration in various branches where law plays a role, commercial and industrial employments, and all other activities that postulate and require the use of legal knowledge and skill are all included in the broad concept[13] of legal education[14]. Legal education stands for the enhancement of human sensibility and injects a sense of protecting human liberty and equality before the law.

The bar and bench standards reflect the quality and standard of legal education received at law school and have an impact on the legal system. Ignorance of the law is a sin that cannot be excused, not innocence. As a result, legal education is essential not only for the production of competent lawyers but also for the cultivation of law-abiding citizens with an understanding of human values, legal ethics, and human rights.


"Law is an essential means of change and the cement of society." It is impossible to overstate the significance of legal education in a democratic society. Understanding public affairs is enhanced by law knowledge. The study emphasizes the importance of having a basic understanding of social values as well as the ability to articulate ideas clearly and persuasively. Knowing the law is everyone's most important duty.


Ignorance of the law is a sin that cannot be excused, not innocence. As a result, lawyers are expected to act as change agents and social engineers in governance and development. As a result, legal education is essential not only for producing good lawyers but also for cultivating law-abiding citizens who are indoctrinated with concepts of human values and human rights[15]. Law ought to be studied in the social content if it is a tool for social control and social engineering. This means combining subjects in the social and behavioral sciences with those in law. The lawyer would be able to use this to help the public grow and solve problems in a way that is acceptable to society. Considerable goals of legal education include the following:

1. Legal education ought to be well-equipped to deal with the varying complexities of situations and be able to meet the ever-increasing demands of society.

2. When it comes to directing and facilitating social change, legal education plays a crucial role. In this regard, it must act as society's conscience-keeper.

3. Legal communication must demonstrate moral superiority; shall ensure that no segment of society is denied access to its services due to poverty or social status, and shall maintain a high level of competence and discipline.

4. The goal of legal education is to give students the right training, which should be provided by professionals.

5. Law students are expected to learn the substantive and procedural operative legal rules through legal education.

6. The production of effective lawyers is the primary goal of legal education.

7. To deal with the diverse and expanding world of legal practice, legal education must equip students with the necessary theoretical and practical skills.



In free India, legal education gained momentum and importance. When India gained independence, a lot of its people were poor and illiterate. The immediate concern was reducing inequality and providing millions of people with basic amenities. Legal education was anticipated to bring the legal system into line with the country's social, economic, and political needs when a democratic form of government was implemented[16]. As a result, achieving the goals outlined in the Constitution was the primary concern for the legal system in the early days of free India.

The current legal education system suffers from a number of flaws that significantly impede the development of India's next generation of effective lawyers and teachers. These include:

1. In all states, there is no separate law school that oversees educational institutions.

2. Currently, the law schools are a part of general universities that already have a lot of other faculties like art, science, and commerce colleges. The curriculum, syllabi, and other documents suffered as a result. and, undoubtedly, on the growth of legal education.

3. Private non-grant law schools are sprouting everywhere, and they lack resources. In such establishments, there are only part-time teachers employed.

4. Permanent teacher positions are not filled, possibly due to a lack of qualified candidates and, of course, poor recruitment practices.

5. Currently, admission to legal education is contingent on an individual having nothing to do.

6. The students of today want to be doctors or engineers, but they don't want to be lawyers or teachers of the law. This indicates that these students are not attracted to legal education. By providing students with job opportunities, this deficit can be addressed.

7. Regional language was used as the medium of instruction and examination in some colleges. Students will be taught regional languages, but legal education will not be the same everywhere. Deficiency may result from a diverse legal education.

8. Legal education does not attract students to sit in classrooms because traditional teaching methods are still utilized.

9. In some educational establishments, the attendance ratio is extremely low.

10. The majority of law schools continue to teach using the traditional talk and chalk method. Teachers are still not motivated to use cutting-edge teaching methods like the discussion method, computer, or projector. The outcomes of such a conventional educational system will not be able to deal with the issues that arise in the modern IT age. As a result, students acquire traditional knowledge and skills. However, the traditional curriculum and syllabi do not provide the diverse skills and multitasking abilities that are required in the modern IT age.

11. Students at rural law schools lack adequate clinical (practical) knowledge. They are acquiring theoretical advocacy knowledge.

12. Due to the fact that their curriculum allows for such assistance, students of some reputable law schools used to assist judges and leading practitioners. As a result, these students develop all of the advocacy skills that rural students lack.

13. There is no internship in the legal field like there is in the medical field. It remained in India for three years before being withdrawn following the Hon. Decree of the Supreme Court



India's promising concept captured the attention of the Ford Foundation, one of the world's leading philanthropic organizations with its headquarters in the United States. With India's political and military leaders choosing democracy over dictatorship, Ford predicted great potential there. Herbert Merillat, a lawyer, and Carl B. Spaeth, Dean of Stanford Law School, two Ford representatives, traveled to India to observe the legal system, conceptualize the issue of legal education as perceived by Indians, and determine what Indians have done or are planning to do to address these issues.


However, Spaeth and Merillat discovered that there was widespread skepticism regarding the possibility of altering the status quo. After that, Harvard law professor Arthur Von Mehren went to India to continue Ford's research on this topic. He was of the opinion that the laws themselves had to be written by Indians educated in India in order for Indian society to begin accepting the democratic rule of law as legitimate. Legal education, by shaping the men and minds that will address themselves to the problems of law, offers the best — probably the only substantial — hope of accelerating and consciously assisting the process, in my opinion, due to the professional nature of lawyers. In fact, legal education is probably the only potentially decisive key to the problem of India's lack of legal and socio-economic development.


 In the meantime, the Gajendragadkar committee's report on reorganizing legal education at the University of Delhi and the law commission of India's 1958 report on reforming judicial administration were presented.


Von Mehren persuaded Ford officials in New York to fund an Indian university for the first time. His plan was to collaborate with Indians and recruit an Indian law professor to work with the Americans. Although the US scholars brought a great deal of knowledge about legal education, the best American advice would not have been implemented without Indian assistance. However, Ford gave over half a million dollars to Banaras Hindu University rather than Delhi University, which surprised many Indians. Unfortunately, the university was unable to enroll a sufficient number of potentially impressive students due to Banaras's economic poverty, inaccessibility, and severe caste and language tensions. Later, Prof. Kenneth Pye from the Georgetown University Law Center went to India to assess the law program at BHU. Pye discovered serious issues with inadequate library facilities, a vague syllabus, faculty aptitude issues, and inadequate infrastructure facilities. It was discovered that the quality of the students was extremely low, and the lectures given by professors who did not use textbooks were dry.


In 1885, Justice Muthuswami Iyer emphasized the need for a formal college setting to provide legal education on a scientific basis, prompting calls for reform. Additionally, authorities in charge of legal education in India considered a number of separate and collaborative efforts.



By placing education-related matters in List II of the Seventh Schedule, the Indian Constitution essentially entrusted the responsibility of education delivery to the States. However, it is now included in the provision of concurrent legislative authority to the Union and States5. The professions of law, medicine, and other fields are also included in List III.


However, legal education is not specifically addressed in India's Schedule VII to the Constitution. As a result, the more general entries pertaining to higher education and the right to practice before courts serve as the means by which standards for legal education are regulated.

Entry 66 of the Seventh Schedule to the Indian Constitution talks about "coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education." Additionally, education is mentioned in entry 25 of List III, which reads as follows:

"25. Under the conditions outlined in Entries 63, 64, 65, and 66 of List I, education, including medical education and universities; work-related technical and vocational education.

The rights of individuals to practice before the Supreme Court and the High Courts are among the subjects of List I entries 77 and 78. The entries say as much as

“77. the Supreme Court's organization, constitution, jurisdiction, and powers, including its powers of contempt and the fees it collects; individuals who are qualified to practice before the Supreme Court."

“78. Constitution, organization, and vacation policies of the High Courts, with the exception of those pertaining to officers and servants of the High Court; individuals authorized to practice in front of the High Courts."


The Indian Parliament has enacted laws to regulate professional legal education in accordance with entries 66, 77, and 78 of List I. The regulation is enforced by two statutory bodies established by the aforementioned laws: the University Grants Commission, which serves as an umbrella organization for all higher education institutions, and the Bar Council of India, which is the highest professional body responsible for setting professional standards.


Several meetings and conferences emphasized the need for an all-India Bar and a uniform system of regulating the legal profession as the Indian Constitution created a uniform judicial system[17].

The Supreme Court Judge served as chairman of the All India Bar Committee, which was established by the government. In its report, the aforementioned committee noted that, in the absence of a centralized authority, different High Courts' requirements for enrolment as a lawyer varied. Additionally, there is variation in a number of other legal education standards across the nation. As a result, the Committee suggested setting up a State Bar Council for each state and a National All India Bar Council to oversee legal profession regulation. The significant suggestion of the Board was that the zenith body ought to likewise oversee the principles of lawful training in India. The Advocates Act of 1961 was enacted as a comprehensive Advocates Bill in Parliament in order to implement the All India Bar Committee's recommendations.



By virtue of its authority under List I of the Indian Constitution, the Parliament of India enacted the Advocates Act, 1961, which established the Bar Council of India as the country's highest body.[18] In accordance with this Act, the BCI was obligated to promote legal education and establish standards for such education in consultation with Indian universities. In accordance with section 49 of the Advocates Act of 1961, the BCI drafted the Bar Council of India Rules of 1965, which exclusively dealt with the minimum requirements for legal education in chapter IV. In order to raise the standard of legal education in India, these regulations were periodically amended.



As a result, the Advocates Act of 1961 grants the BCI authority to establish the minimum requirements that must be met by a student in order to be admitted to a course leading to a degree in law at any recognized university and the standards of legal education that must be adhered to by such universities.


In the case of Bar Council of U.P. v. State of U.P.[19], the Supreme Court ruled that the Advocates Act, 1961, of which the Bar Council of India (BCI) is a part, is an enactment made pursuant to Entries 77 and 78 of Schedule VII. This means that BCI is envisioned as the highest professional body for regulating and enforcing the standards that members of the Bar are expected to uphold. In accordance with the various State Bar Councils, BCI is in charge of everything that has to do with admission, practice, ethics, privileges, rules, discipline, and professional development.


However, BCI's responsibilities extend beyond professional standards to include regulatory aspects of legal education as well. The 14th Report of the Law Commission of India, which was led by the great jurist and first Attorney General of India, Shri M.C. Setalvad, noted BCI's significance to legal education as early as 1958. The Law Commission made the following observation in anticipation of the establishment of an All-India Bar Council, which eventually evolved into the Bar Council of India[20]: "One of the main subjects to which the All-India Bar Committee of 1953 gave its attention was the formation of a unified Indian Bar." The Committee's detailed and practical recommendations called for a nationwide roster of advocates who would be free to practice in any location. It took into consideration the requirements for admission to the common roll of advocates and acknowledged the need for coordination between the professional organizations that would provide practical instruction in law, conduct examinations in it, and, as a result, regulate admission to the Bar and the universities that would handle the academic aspect of legal education.


 A twelve-member Legal Education Committee of the All-India Bar Council, which was to include representatives from the various State Bar Councils, was suggested as a means of achieving this goal. The Committee was to include two judges, five people chosen by the All-India Bar Council, and five people chosen by these seven members from universities.


The Advocates Act of 1961 further demonstrates BCI's regulation of legal education. The following is a list of the[21] functions that the Bar Council of India is tasked with carrying out in Section 7 of the Act:

(1) Establishing standards for legal education and promoting legal education in collaboration with Indian universities and state bar councils;

(2) To authorize the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect universities in accordance with such directions as it may give in this regard in order to recognize universities whose degree in law will be a requirement for enrollment as an advocate;

In its decision in Bar Council of India v. Board of Management, Dayanand College of Law[22],  the Supreme Court examined the statutory powers granted to BCI by the Advocates Act, 1961, as well as the Rules formulated thereunder. It came to the conclusion that since BCI was concerned with the standards of the legal profession and the equipment of those seeking entry, BCI was also concerned with the country's legal education.

The Bar Council of India also established three supplementary organs to fulfill its statutory mandate, and in 1962, all universities offering legal education changed from a two-year program to a three-year program in accordance with BCI orders[23].

(a) Committee for Legal Education: The Legal Education Committee was established by the Bar Council of India in accordance with Advocates Act, 1961, Section 10(2)(b). Even though this committee was created solely for academic purposes, there is only one academic member on it.

b) Trust of the Bar Council of India: In 1974, the Bar Council of India also established The Bar Council of India Trust, a public charity. In order to improve legal education and maintain professional standards, this trust was established. The Trust intended to promote legal research and establish premier law schools in this regard.

c) The Legal Education Directorate: In addition, in 2010, the Indian Bar Council established a Directorate of Legal Education with the mission of organizing, running, conducting, holding, and administering the following activities:

(i) Continuing Legal Education;

(ii) Teachers' Training;

(iii) Advanced Specialized Professional Courses;

(iv) Education Program for Indian students seeking registration after obtaining a law degree from a foreign university;

(v) Legal Research; and

(vi) Any other task that may be assigned to it by the Legal Education Committee and the Bar Council of India.


With a help of over three organs, the Bar Board of India has embraced not many significant stages in the field of Legitimate Schooling.

First, a National Law School with the status of a Deemed University is being established in Bangalore. This institution sets the standard for professional legal education by pioneering curriculum and clinical education reforms.


Second, standard law textbooks and other subjects related to the law are published.

Thirdly, instruction for recent law school graduates. Fourthly, a plan for legal aid clinical in law schools must be implemented and clinical education in law schools must be improved. In 2010, the Bar Council of India also established its first Curriculum Development Committee (CDC) to help universities and other educational institutions design courses in law and related fields. The Committee has emphasized faculty autonomy in university course design and implementation. According to the CDC, the integrated law course and the first degree subjects are highly technical, necessitating curriculum harmonization. In addition, the institutions' faculty must make significant efforts to tailor the course and develop a teaching-learning strategy based on the local requirements and resources.


It addresses the preliminary design of courses, particularly those that will be assigned in the first year of study for both Double Degree integrated courses and Unitary Degree courses. In terms of additional courses, the CDC would develop similar plans in the future. Study materials and casebooks based on the course design are also encouraged.


The CDC emphasizes that this report should only be used as a minimum suggestive benchmark. As a result, universities are free to raise standards and improve on existing ones. The role of legal education has been categorized by the CDC as professional education and value education. It states that universities place more of an emphasis on legal education as a value education; The second function of professional education is to examine the BCI in search of standardization with the assistance of universities. Additionally, it has discovered a number of unresolved contradictions that BCI must resolve. The introduction of the Bar Examination for Advocate Enrollment is one such significant contradiction. Additionally, it has stressed the significance of the Faculty Improvement Program for the so-called National Law Schools and the issue of a lack of qualified faculty. In the following words, it highlights the distinction between the roles played by law schools and colleges:

The role distinctions between a law school or college and a law university must now be clearly understood. The purpose of a law school or college is to provide skilled legal education through the prescribed courses and guidelines established by the Bar Council. In order to prepare students to practice law, the school or college must strictly adhere to the requirements. A Law University, on the other hand, has a larger responsibility than a typical school or college to carry out its higher educational experiments with both low-end and high-end knowledge integration. In addition, law schools and colleges must develop human resources and continue higher education and research in legal courses.


The function of the University Grants Commission At the time of India's independence, significant sociopolitical shifts were taking place throughout the nation. In 1948, the University Education Commission was established to standardize higher education in India and promote social welfare. “to report on Indian university education and suggest improvements and extensions that might be desirable to suit the country's present and future needs and aspirations,” Dr. S Radhakrishnan was given the position of Chairman of the Commission.


The Committee's main recommendation was to reorganize the University Grants Committee in the same manner as the University Grants Commission of the United Kingdom, with a full-time Chairman and other members chosen from a distinguished group of educators. The Union Government decided in 1952 that the University Grants Commission could be contacted in any case involving the distribution of grants-in-aid from public funds to Central and other educational institutions of higher learning. Consequently, on December 28, 1953, the late Minister of Education, Shri Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, formally opened the University Grants Commission (UGC).[24] However, the University Grants Commission (UGC) became a statutory body in November 1956 under the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The United Grants Commission (UGC) is the only grant-giving organization in the nation with two responsibilities, a unique distinction; that of funding, as well as the coordination, determination, and upkeep of standards in higher education institutions.

The UGC is tasked by law with

  1. promoting and coordinating university education and
  2. establishing and maintaining university teaching, examination, and research standards.
  3. Creating guidelines for educational minimum standards.
  4. keeping an eye on changes in university and college education;
  5. Distributing grants to colleges and universities.
  6. Acting as a crucial link between the Union, state governments, and educational establishments.
  7. Providing advice to the federal and state governments regarding the necessary steps to enhance university education.[25]

According to the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Prem Chand Jain v. R.K. Chabbra[26], the University Grants Commission (UGC) was established in accordance with Entry 66 of List I under Section 4 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956. The Advocates Act grants the BCI the authority to promote legal education and to establish the standards for such education in consultation with universities and state bar councils. On the other hand, the UGC Act of 1956 gave the UGC the mandate According to the Act's Statement of Objects and Reasons, the UGC has the authority to recommend to any university the steps that must be taken to reform and improve university education and to advise the university on how to put those recommendations into action. The University Grants Commission (UGC) is required to serve as an advisory body to the Central Government regarding issues pertaining to the coordination of university facilities and standard-keeping. In consultation with the university in question, the UGC has the authority to initiate an investigation or inspection of any university and provide advice on any subject that has been the subject of such an investigation or inspection.


The Supreme Court of India has repeatedly emphasized the UGC's role and responsibility in regulating Indian higher education standards. In this regard, the Supreme Court's decision in the case of University of Delhi v. Raj Singh[27], is extremely instructive. In that case, the court ruled that the UGC regulations establishing qualifications for teaching staff would take precedence over all other laws, including those enacted by Parliament. In the case of Prof. Yashpal v. State of Chattisgarh[28], the Supreme Court also succinctly reiterated the regulatory nature of the UGC, stating that "The University Grants Commission Act has been made with reference to Entry 66." The UGC was established to oversee the university system, and it lacks the expertise to handle each type of higher education. The purpose of the Act is to ensure that a body established by the Central Government coordinates and sets standards for universities, which are institutions of higher learning. It established a panel on legal education under the direction of the retired Chief Justice of the Indian Supreme Court. This panel's mission was to direct and standardize legal education. Sadly, it has not significantly improved the quality of legal education in India[29]. However, in 1990, the UGC established a Curriculum Development Centre (CDC) headed by Professor Upendra Baxi to develop a new law curriculum to encourage human resource development.

The CDC identified three primary obstacles to legal education: multidisciplinary enrichment of law curricula and corresponding pedagogical modifications, modernization of syllabi for social relevance.


For a number of courses, the CDC prepared comprehensive syllabuses and curriculums[30].

The analysis from the previous two sub-sections shows that BCI and UGC share responsibility for regulating legal education standards. The foundation of Indian regulation of legal education standards is the consultative relationship between BCI and UGC. In addition, the Supreme Court of India has occasionally intervened to play a crucial role in the operation of Indian legal education.



In a landmark decision like Deepak Sibal v. Punjab University[31], the Supreme Court of India said that law school should be encouraged as much as possible without being too intrusive.

The Supreme Court has attempted to convince the state to recognize the significance of legal knowledge discrimination. Clearly, the state or standing bodies frequently adopt negative and discouraging policies regarding legal education. In Indian Council of Legal Education v. BCRI, the Bar Council of India's decision to prohibit anyone under 45 from entering the legal profession was ruled to be unreasonable and unconstitutional[32].

Newcomers to legal education will undoubtedly be harmed by restrictions or regulations of this kind.


As a result, the slow and unsatisfactory development of legal education was caused by unjustified government intervention and the failure to strengthen and expand legal education.

The supreme court ruled in Bar Council of India vs. Aparna Basu Mallick[33] that the Bar Council of India must have the authority to set the standards of legal education that universities in the country must adhere to if acquiring a degree in law is required to be qualified to be admitted on a state roll. Standards for attending law classes, lectures, tutorials, and moot courts established by the Indian Bar Council. must be met before an advocate can be registered.


The Supreme Court of India ruled in State of Maharashtra vs. Manubhai Pragaji Vashi,[34] that the state of Maharashtra's refusal to grant aid to recognized private law colleges was unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 21 and 39-A of the constitution.


It concluded that, like other faculties that are eligible for the grant, the state is obligated to provide grant-in-aid to recognized private law colleges under Article 21 and Article 39-A of the constitution.

In the case of V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India[35], the Supreme Court of India examined the Bar Council of India's rule-making authority under section 24(3)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961. The Bar Council of India's order requiring one year of pre-enrollment training and apprenticeship was overturned by the Supreme Court. That was noted by the court;

“The contested rules that the Bar Council had drafted had to be scrapped because they had led to firing at the wrong target. The only thing the Bar Council of India can do is suggest ways to encourage universities to offer this kind of legal education; In consultation with universities, it may enact education standards and syllabuses.


The decision of the Indian Bar Council to prohibit evening law school was overturned by the Supreme Court of India in a similar case. The court made the following observation in Gopalakrishnan Chatrath v. Bar Council of India[36]: "It has been further contended that the right of the person who wants to educate himself in legal education would not be at par with others. The right of the person who wants to educate himself in legal education would not be at par with others." It would also be against the constitution's Article 14 to deny legal education during evening sessions. Everyone has the right to be treated equally in education, whether that education is in law, science, or art.


In Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra[37], the Supreme Court of India made the observation that the fundamental purpose of education is the same everywhere and at any time. This was made in reference to an employee taking part-time legal education and then taking advantage of an opportunity to become an advocate. Through a methodical process, the development of the body, the environment of the mind, the sublimation of emotions, and the illumination of the spirit, it is to transform the human personality into a pattern of perfection. Education is a way to prepare for life both now and in the future. We can see that an employee's part-time legal education is "For a living and for life, here and hereafter," so its denial is completely unjustified.


In Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice v. Bar Council of India[38], the Supreme Court of India also overturned a Bar Council of India resolution prohibiting people over 45 from becoming advocates for the State Bar Council. According to the assertion made by the Bar Council of India, the legal profession is pious and honorable with the goal of serving humanity through the justice system. As a result, the Bar Council of India has a pious duty to protect the public image of the legal profession by limiting the number of retired employees who enter the workforce. However, the argument was stopped by the Supreme Court.


 As a result, an apex court has always scrutinized the functions of the BCI and the UGC. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered the UGC to use its authority to maintain uniform standards and prevented BCI from engaging in ultraviral acts.



The legal profession is facing new obstacles as a result of globalization. Legal study within the territorial confines of a nation's legal system is hampered by globalization. In order to provide a more comprehensive approach, the general jurisprudence concepts must be expanded. To meet the challenges of globalization, a lawyer needs to have a vision of the problems that will arise. He or she must be eager to serve justice and capable of developing novel tools and methods to meet the ever-evolving requirements of the present. The future cause of action's responsibilities cannot be met by legal education.


The people's needs are met and all facilities are provided by a functioning legal system. A good legal system is one that applies the rule of law to everyone. Due to the rigidity of the law, the Indian legal system, including the Constitution, is flexible. Rule of law is essential to the success of any legal system. According to the global legal education system, we need to strengthen the tenacity of future lawyers and expand the mythology of law schools.


The most recent institutional innovation that is elevating our students to the same level as international students in the current global context is the concept of National Law Universities. These are put in place with the intention of aligning the country's entire legal system with the best practices of legal educators.


The legal system must adapt to the revolutionary shifts in information and communication technologies. New legal issues regarding methods of protecting poor and marginalized groups have arisen as a result of globalization and the state's withdrawal from its traditional role. Law's nature and institutions are undergoing a paradigm shift. In the coming years, people working in law and legal services will need the state to come up with the best way to improve professional legal education. To achieve a supervisory and control mechanism that holds professional law schools accountable for maintaining teaching, research, and activity standards, a suitable model is required. The legal requirements of various segments of society, the delay and cost of obtaining justice, and the effect of globalization on equality and human rights The role of professions in justice and development, as well as information and communication, are all undergoing significant technological change.



The participation of representatives of the judiciary, the Bar Council, and the UGC in legal education must be reflected.In order for law graduates to acquire sufficient knowledge and experience, the appropriate action needs to be taken.


Law school graduates should be required to study professional ethics. In legal education, the lecture method along with other contemporary methods should be adopted. Case and problem methods should be required. In the study, practical training in drafting and pleading ought to be developed. At the hearing, students should visit the court. Teachers of law and researchers working in a variety of legal fields need ongoing legal education. Graduate law students, law teachers, legal researchers, and court officials all require legal education. In the right way, knowledge and proficiency can be applied to the legal profession.


Legal education must focus on justice and society. Participation in programs like Lok Adalat, Legal Aid, legal literacy, and paralegal training are all examples of legal education. In order to gain experience in the field of legal activities, clinical legal education should be given more importance. In the field of legal education, philanthropic initiative must be encouraged. In India, legal education aims to produce lawyers who can bring about more meaningful justice in society.





It is evident that, with the exception of the length of the courses and the entry level exam for the bar, there has been no innovation in legal education since independence[39]. Legal education in India has not been able to respond historically and meaningfully to contemporary challenges. The preparation of lawyers for corporate and multinational corporations has remained the sole focus of legal education. In spite of various committees for reforming legal education and their muddled recommendations, the state of legal education in India has not changed significantly. The Indian legal education system is not yet up to speed on how to deal with the issues brought on by globalization. In comparison to other fields of study, such as Science, engineering, medicine, and management—as well as the legal system—have not kept up with recent social and technological advancements.


The current system of legal education has failed to provide the content necessary for practical exposure, despite the fact that it aims to develop personnel for the bar and bench. The studies focus solely on theory and employ an outdated chalk and duster lecture format. All of the so-called reform efforts appear to be carried out without considering the needs of the grassroots and lacking a long-term vision. It appears as though the instructions are hallucinations.


In its Gangtok Declaration, the recently held National Convention on Legal Education in Gangtok, Sikkim, also emphasized the need to establish autonomous legal academic and research institutions in order to achieve the following goals of legal education:

  1. accessibility,
  2. equity, and
  3. excellence to fulfill the aspiration of "We the people of India" and achieve the fundamental goals of legal education[40].

With the exception of a few, the majority of legal education institutions are mediocre. There are a few exceptional islands, but they are few and insufficient to meet the national need for a legal pool. In addition, the majority of the critical components of continuing legal education—integration of ICT and other cutting-edge technology—are absent. The research that is produced by legal education institutions is pathetic. There is neither a policy nor a program in place to cultivate a research mindset among faculty or students.


In reality, legal education in India needs to be overhauled. However, rather than repeating earlier futile experiments, a new method of restructuring needs to be developed. Public opinion is consolidated and executive policy is crystallized by law; It strengthens relationships among people and drives social change. Law school helps people understand how politics and public affairs work. It aids in precise expression, facilitates skillful document interpretation, and facilitates the use of legal language to argue and persuade others. Morality is indirectly enforced and social values are instilled among people through the law, which is a social policy.


Legal knowledge is a duty because ignorance of the law is not an excuse and because the law assumes that everyone knows it. Knowledge is a social necessity.


Law consolidates public opinion and makes executive policy concrete. It also strengthens social ties and drives social change. Law school helps people understand how politics and public affairs work. It makes it easier to express yourself accurately, to interpret documents, and to use legal language to argue and persuade others. Morality is indirectly enforced and social values are instilled among people through the law, which is a social policy. In contemporary developing societies, which are struggling to transform into social welfare states and are seeking to improve the socioeconomic situation of the people through peaceful means, the concepts of law, legal education, and development have come to be intertwined. In a developing nation like India, it is essential for legal education to produce lawyers with a social conscience.


Law has to play a crucial and vital role in a democratic society; law must serve as a vehicle for economic and social change in a developing society; and promoting legal education and research in law will strengthen democracy, respect for law, and the rule of law in India. This awareness extends beyond the educated professional lawyers, judges, and law teachers.



1. Gupta Kalpesh Kumar L., (2017), “Legal Education In India: Issues and Challenges”, LAMBERT Academic Publishing.

2. Menon N.R. Madhava,(2008) ,“Clinical Legal Education In India”, Eastern Book Company.

3. Tripathy G.P.,(2016) “Legal Education In India”, Central Law Publications.

4. Baxi Uppendra, (2010), “Legal Education In India”, Kindle Edition.

5. Mehta P.L., (2002), “Legal Education and Profession in India”, Deep and Deep Publication.

6. Rao G. Manoher and Rao K. Srinivas, (2017), “Legal education in India: Challenges and Prospects”, Asia Law House.

7. Rath Rashmita and Mohanta Abhinash , (2017), “Legal education system in India”, Atomic OWL, Digital Media Pvt. Ltd, Berhampur, Odisha, India.

8. Singh Bijay Pratap and Singh Uday Pratap , (2017), “Legal education in India: New Horizons”, ABS Books,U.P























[1] Azmi Hasnal S. Sharimul, ‘Legal Education in India’ ALTC, New Delhi (1999) p.35

[2] Iyer Krishna V.R., ‘The social Dimensions of Law and justice in Contemporary India’ p.1

[3] Ivaturi Sundari, ‘Education of Legal Aid and legal Literacy’ (2012) p.32

[4] Repot of the Curriculum Development centre in law, New Delhi, (1990) p.12

[5] Anand, A.S.I., Supra note, p.126

[6] Repot of ‘The Curriculum Development centre in Law,Vol. U.G.C.,New Delhi,1990, p.12

[7] Bharati, ‘Legal education Some Critical Issues’ (1999) p.122

[8] The Encyclopedia of education, Inddo and Libr. (1971) Vol.5 p.355

[9] Agarwal S.K., ‘A Report on Legal education in India’ (1972) p.73

[10] Mishra D.N., ‘Legal education in India- Present status and Prospectus’ (1999) p.19

[11] Faroque Mahammed, ‘legal education Contemporary Trends and challenges’ AIR,(1998)6

[12] Azmi Hasant, ‘Legal Education in India’ (1999) p.43

[13] Gajendragadkar, Committee on the Re- organization in the University of Delhi,1964 p.74

[14] Ivaturi Sundari, ‘Education of Legal Aid and legal Literacy’ (2012) p.43

[15] Devdas, Advocate, ‘History of Legal Education In India’, National University of Advanced Legal Studies, Cochin

[16] Repot of the Curriculum development Centre in law,New Delhi,1990, p.12

[17] Annual meeting Madras on Constitution a Supreme court of india,Feb.1990

[18] O.N. Mobindroo Vs Bar council of India, AIR 1968 SC888

[19] AIR 1973 SC 231

[20] 14thReport law Commission of India, 1958 p.520

[21] Advocate Act, 1961,section 7

[22] (2007) 2 SCC 202

[23] Menon Madhava ed. ‘legal Education and India Status and Problems’ New Delhi (1983) p.299

[24] www.ugc.ac.indiaabout/genisis.html visited on 20.02.2010

[25] Jena K.C., Journal of Indian Law Institute, 44(4) p.565

[26] (1984) 2 SCC 302

[27] 1994 Supp(3) SCC 516

[28] (2005) 5 SCC 42

[29] Mitra N.L., ‘Legal Education in India, Italy(2000)

[30] Indraiyan, N.k. ‘The challenges of legal education’ Indian bar review, 2001, pp.107-112

[31] AIR 1989 SC 493

[32] AIR 1995 SC 691

[33] AIR 1994 SC 1334

[34] AIR 1996 SC (5) 730

[35] (1999) 3 SCC 176

[36] AIR 2001 P H 41

[37] AIR 1996 SC 1708

[38] AIR 1995 SC 691

[39] Buxi Upendra ‘Enculturing law –Legal education in India, 2010 p.29

[40] Central Law University News (51) 26,2013 p.26


Let's Start With Publication