Delhi High Court
S.N. Singh vs University Of Delhi & Others on 9 February, 2011
Author: Sanjiv Khanna
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4840/2006
S.N. Singh ....Petitioner
Through: Mr.V.Sudeer, Adv.
VERSUS
University of Delhi & Others .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Budana Shukla, Adv. for GNCTD.
Mr.Mayank Manish, Adv. for UGC.
Mr.Rajiv Bansal, Adv. for DDA.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 09.02.2011
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
The petitioner S.N.Singh who is a Professor in the Faculty of Law
University of Delhi, New Delhi had filed the present petition in 2006 for
the following reliefs:-
"a) To direct the Respondent No.1 to bring its
Ordinances in conformity with the Bar Council of India
Rules regarding courses of studies prescribed for LL.B.
three-year Degree course;
b) To direct the respondent No.1 to teach the course of
studies prescribed by the Bar Council of India with
effect from the academic year 2006-2007 starting with
LL.B. First year students followed by second and third
year students during the academic year 2007-2008 and
2008-2009, respectively;
c) To direct respondent No.1 to teach the same syllabus
and hold one common examination for all the students
of LL.B. studying at all the three Law Centres with
effect from the academic year 2006-2007;
d) To direct respondent No.1 to arrange for teaching at
least three hours per week per subject as prescribed by
the Bar Council of India Rules;
e) To restrain respondent No.1 from admitting more
students than the number prescribed by the Respondent
No.2.
f) To direct the Bar Council of India to ensure that the
Respondent University does not violate the Bar Council
of India Rules having statutory force and intended to
improve the standards of legal education.
g) To direct the respondent No.1 - University of Delhi
and respondent No.3-the University Grants
Commission - to take steps and provide such funds as
may be required by the Respondent University for
provision of a separate building to Law Centre II at
South Delhi Campus."
Initially while issuing notice, it was noticed that the primary issue
raised in the writ petition is regarding the syllabus and the course of
studies being taught in the Faculty of Law. It was stated that the same
was required to be updated and should be in consonance with the course
study prescribed by the Bar Council of India. During the last nearly five
years substantial changes have taken place in the course material and
syllabus.
Order sheets reveal that subsequently the main issue that has been
examined is with regard to the construction of a building for the law
centres. The Faculty of Law, University of Delhi has three law centres,
one located in North Campus, the other located at Mandir Marg and the
third located at Dhaula Kuan. Taking note of the problems, a number of
orders have been passed by this Court. Reference can be made to the
orders dated 10th October, 2007, 18th December, 2007, 25th March, 2008
and 31st March, 2008.
A developed plot admeasuring 12.7 acres at Dhaka Complex near
Mukherjee Nagar has been made available for construction of a new
building for the Faculty of Law. The said complex will be equipped
with up to date and latest facilities for housing all the three centres,
namely, the Campus Law Centre, Law Centre-I and Law Centre-II.
Copy of the status report dated 8th February, 2011 has been
handed over to us in Court. The status report gives details of the
progress made with regard to construction of the building for the Faculty
of Law at Dhaka Complex. Building plans have been finalized by the
Dean, Faculty of Law and the cost of construction has been estimated.
The estimates have been sent to University Grants Commission for
allocation of funds. Along with the status report, copy of the various
minutes in which the said aspects were deliberated upon, has been
enclosed.
In view of the aforesaid developments, we are inclined to dispose
of the present public interest writ petition with the direction to the
respondents including University Grants Commission to expedite the
whole process and ensure that the entire project is completed within next
two years. We also note that the syllabus and the course structure
require periodical upgradation and changes. We hope and trust that the
Dean and other persons incharge of the course material in the Faculty of
Law, University of Delhi are conscious and are working in the said
direction. It is open to the petitioner to send and make his
recommendation in this regard.
With the aforesaid observations, we dispose of the present writ
petition.
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
CHIEF JUSTICE
February 09, 2011
Bisht
