IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 15..12..2008 C O R A M The Honourable Mr. A.K. Ganguly, Chief Justice and The Honourable Mr. Justice K. Chandru Writ Petition No.22399 of 2008 Dr. G. Krishnamurthy .. Petitioner versus 1. The Vice Chancellor, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai. 2. The Director of Legal Services, Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai. 3. The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai. 4. The Principal, Dr. Ambedkar Law College, Chennai-104. 5. The Chief Secretary to the (*) Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-9. 6. The Secretary to Law Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9. 7. The Chairman, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-9. .. Respondents (Respondents 5 & 7 deleted vide suo motu order dated 11.9.2008 in the writ petition) Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct M.L. Degree Course Classes as per Rules and Regulations of Dr. Ambedkar Law University before conducting examination. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr. Raja Kalifulla, Govt. Pleader O R D E R ( Delivered by The Honourable the Chief Justice ) On the last occasion, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and hence the matter is listed today for dismissal. Today also, nobody appears for the petitioner at the time of call. But since this is a public interest litigation, we cannot dismiss the writ petition for the non-appearance of the petitioner. 2. This writ petition has been filed complaining of poor maintenance of standards in the M.L. Post Graduate Degree Course in the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University. The initial complaint is that no classes have been conducted for the M.L. Degree Course. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 4 to 6 by one S. Mohamed Abdul Khader, who claims to be the Principal of Dr. Ambedkar Law College. Strangely, the counter has also been filed in respect of the Chief Secretary to the State Government, even though the name of the Chief Secretary has been deleted from the list. 4. In answer to the contention that no classes have been conducted for the M.L. Degree Course, it is stated in paragraph 13 of the counter that classes have been held on two days, viz. on 1.9.2008 and 2.9.2008, but thereafter, the classes could not be held because of the student unrest. In paragraph 10 of the counter, which has been filed today, it has been stated that there were mistakes in the question papers, but as soon as the mistakes were detected, the Professor concerned who is in charge of the branch of law on which the examination was held corrected the mistake by going to the examination hall before the students started writing their answers, and the mistakes are claimed as typographical errors. 5. The question papers have been annexed to the typed set of papers and we are extracting hereinbelow the question papers which have been annexed to the typed set : "MODERN CONCEPTS AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF PROPERTY LAW PART-A 1. Explain the theory of property. 2. Desclibe the different mode of acquirisition and kinds of ownership. 3. Analyse the importance and essentials of possesion. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ PART-B 4. Exploin the relationship between property and law. 5. Exploin Persion in fact ed in law. 6. Different between owership and possession." "MODERN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW PART-A 1. Dicuss the absolute grounds for Refunal of Regintater of hade maks and Relature Coumers for refunal for Regstratum of trade Maks. 2. Infingement of hade marks and the remidier available Discuss. 3. Passing off actien – Discuss in the scope and remedier available. PART-B 1. Well lenoun hehade mark 2. Transborde Repartaitin 3. TRIPS Agreement" It appears that most of the questions do not make any sense, apart from the fact that the questions contain several gross grammatical mistakes. Further, the person who has set the questions has not at all applied his mind to the subject on which the questions have been set and the questions have been set in a very casual manner and without any application of mind. If this is the standard of M.L. Degree in the University, this Court is shocked and dismayed about the alarming state of affairs. The question papers are clearly indicative of the fact that no seriousness is attached in the matter of conduct of the course for the M.L. Degree and no seriousness is reflected in the matter of setting the question papers for the said examination and we do not know how the candidates who are appearing in the said examination are assessed or degrees conferred on them. 6. In the additional typed set which has been filed in this case, we find that several students of the M.L. Degree Course of Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College have made a representation to the Secretary, Law Department, Government of Tamil Nadu to the effect that the lecturers who are taking M.L. Classes do not possess the requisite qualification and they are unable to explain the subjects taught by them. It is also stated that there is no properly qualified lecturer in any branch in the existing law college to take the M.L. Classes. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. This Court, after perusing these materials, is constrained to come to the conclusion that no standard is maintained in the M.L. Degree Course in the said University. Therefore, this Court, with a deep sense of anguish and anxiety, directs the Director of Legal Studies to look into the matter so as to ensure that proper standards of teaching and holding of classes is maintained and properly qualified teachers are made available to teach students of the M.L. Course. In the name of M.L. Course and conferring M.L. Degrees, this kind of a farce should not be continued. 8. In this context, we may refer to the recommendations made by Shri M.C.Setalvad, the first Attorney General of India and the doyen of the legal profession. In his report on the Reform of Judicial Administration, the learned Attorney General deplored the situation which was prevailing at the time the report was submitted namely, in the year 1958 (14th Law Commission Report). It was stated in the report that the situation is chaotic and the law graduates are churned out as half backed lawyers who do not even know the elements of law and Shri Setalvad described them as drones and parasites let loose on society. 9. The situation did not improve and decades thereafter Chief Justice Ahmadi speaking at the All India Conference of Lawyers on Legal Education and Training held in New Delhi on 18.11.1994 after referring to the report of the Law Commission observed: - "If the standard of legal education in law schools is poor and if enrolment of such 'half-backed' untrained graduates is automatic, as is the position today, the burden has to be borne by the judiciary at all levels since they are, to use the expression of Shri Setalvad, 'let loose' on the Judiciary. The unbecoming scenes which are witnessed in Courts are largely on account of lack of proper training in law and ethical values and the desire to make a fast buck. The justice delivery system depends on the quality of the Bar and, therefore, the Judicary is vitally interested in the improvement of legal education int he country. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the Bar, the Judiciary and the UGC must join hands to raise the standard of legal education in the country." Even the request of the Chief Justice has no effect and in this State, the legal education is at a very low level in most of the colleges. This public interest litigation has drawn the attention of this Court to this very vital aspect. 10. We are very shocked and distressed to make this comment, but we are compelled to do so in view of the disclosures which have been made in this proceeding. We, therefore, direct the first respondent herein, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ viz., the Vice Chancellor, Dr. Ambedkar Law University to depute a team of officials to assess the situation as to the standard which is being followed in the M.L. Degree Course and in the matter of taking of classes in the M.L. Degree Course and setting of question papers and ultimately of conferring degrees. We are at pains to point out that the standard must be drastically improved since the present standard which is being followed in respect of the M.L. Degree Course is definitely much lower than what should be the standard in an Undergraduate Course in a recognised university, especially in such an important city as Chennai. 11. The recommendations of the Body must be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of Madras High Court. Thereafter, the Hon'ble Chief Justice may form a committee and such committee may examine the recommendations and suggest ways and means to improve the standards of legal education. On the said report of the committee, which will be formed by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, the Hon'ble Chief Justice may pass appropriate orders for improving the standards of legal education in M.L. Classes. We, however, direct that the first Committee to be formed by the Vice-Chancellor of Dr.Ambedkar Law University to give the report within a month from date, and thereafter, the Hon'ble Chief Justice may take steps in accordance with the directions contained in this order. It is ofcourse open to the Hon'ble Chief Justice to modify the directions contained in this order and His Lordship may pass such further order or directions as the Hon'ble Chief Justice may deem fit and proper. We hope and trust that at least in this way the standard of legal education may improve. 12. The writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, M.P. No.1 of 2008 is closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. ab/pv To 1. The Vice Chancellor, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai-1. 2. The Director of Legal Services, Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The Controller of Examination, Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, Chennai. 4. The Principal, Dr. Ambedkar Law College, Chennai-104. 5. The Secretary to Law Department, Secretariat, Chennai-9. + 1 CC to Government Pleader,SR.NO.69886,70045 + 1 CC to Mrs.K.Alamelu Saruthini Advocate SR.NO.69918 Writ Petition No.22399 of 2008 PA(CO) EM/20.1.09 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/