Law Faculty


A political drama-thriller web series by the name Tandav has come under scrutiny after students expressed their distress with the shooting interfering in their day to day college life. A letter has been sent to the Delhi University’s (DU) Registrar with respect to the same as the shooting takes place at the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi.

In a strongly-worded letter by Amit Kumar Diwakar, student of the Faculty of Law, DU, on behalf of the students of the Law Faculty, brought into limelight how the shooting of a web series by director Ali Abbas Zaffar was causing great trouble to the students.

Diwakar registered a strong protest against the permission given for shooting on campus.

In his letter to the Registrar, he wrote, “…shooting for the web series… is creating a huge disturbance and affecting day to day affairs of the University including research, classes, library and movements of students in the campus”.

He also mentioned how the violation of various guidelines issued by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) as well as the Supreme Court of India are being violated for the purpose of shooting.

He put this issue ahead as a grave matter of concern and one which requires interference of higher authorities since there has been a violation of fundamental rights such as the Right to Privacy, along with the violation of the Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016 since disturbance has been caused in the movement of disabled persons such as the blind students in the campus.

Noihrit Gogoi, a student at Ramjas College, DU, comments, “I believe the key term here is ‘priority’. We enrol ourselves in a University like DU to engage ourselves in and prioritise an academic environment with, of course, some extracurricular activities. When elements outside of our University like shooting for a film, barges in and interrupts our regular college activities like, even as trivial as going to the library, it compromises the said priority, and that too without our consent while subjugating the ideal environment of a university.”

“Other practical problems like common paths being blocked, disruption in classes, and how many students complained that the film crew was extremely rude and unapologetic during the shooting of Kabir Singh in DU, are always a problem,” he added.

Tandav is one of the most exciting projects taken up by director Ali Abbas Zafar for which he took a year to work upon and will mark his entry into the digital space. The series is co-written by Gaurav Solanki who penned down the well-received film Article 15 which was released earlier this year.

Tandav will be majorly shot in Delhi and is centered around the idea of power corridors of Indian Politics.

The series is set to stream after its shooting is over on Amazon Prime Video in the upcoming year.


Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives


Amrashree Mishra

[email protected]


The Faculty of Law recently suspended the mid-semester break for its students due to the delay in commencement of the session creating outrage among the students. Read on to find out more.

The Faculty of Law, University of Delhi (DU) was established in the year 1924. The department operates through three centres within its campus, namely, Campus Law Centre, Law Centre-I and Law Centre-II and has about 7000 students at present including LL.B., LL.M., and PhD students

On 24th September 2019, the Law Faculty published a notice stating that due to the delay in commencement of classes of LL.B., the Mid Semester break stands cancelled. Further, it also said that the teaching session of the Faculty of Law will continue up to 30th  November 2019, reducing the number of preparation leaves provided to students for semester examinations.

According to sources, the department called off the Mid-Sem break last year as well. This is a sensitive time to terminate the seven days break provided to students as many of them have made non-refundable reservations for going back home but are stuck now as they cannot skip classes.

Amarjeet Kumar Singh, a student of the Faculty of Law said, “This information is true. And I would like to say about this that it is like a punishment to the students for which they have done nothing wrong. But in reality, the department is solely responsible for the delay. Even last year the mid-term break got cancelled/suspended for the same reason”

Kartik Saini, another student of the Faculty of Law said, “This has become a regular practice now. Last year, the same happened & I think it is followed every year. As with other colleges and institutes (Master’s Course) of DU, the session should start by 20th July.  As per the official notice, our classes started on 10th August but in reality, they actually started on 26th August causing a delay in other things. Not only the students & teachers get affected with this but it also leads to violation of BCI (Bar Council of India) norms which have decided the minimum number of classes for each semester. In fact, the Law Faculty is the place where unlawful practice prevails & rules are not followed. Administration condition is pathetic.”


Feature Image Credits: The Law Faculty, Delhi University


Avni Dhawan

[email protected]

Infrastructural and administrative issues find way in the University once again, this time, at the Faculty of Law.
For years, students have complained over the poor infrastructure, dysfunctional air conditioners, not up-to-date technology, and less library space. It was also noted that the administration has not sanctioned the required expenditure of INR 76,00,000.
As reported by The New Indian Express, Rajesh Singh, Deputy librarian informed that a proposal of INR 76,00,000 was submitted by library committee. “Students have been raising these issues for a long time. We have written to the University three to four times since 2016, when the issues came to our knowledge,” he said. The latest request made to the varsity, he said, was in March this year. Singh, later ensured that the Dean had submitted the request to the University Grants Commission and the once the University generates funds, changes will be made.
In a number of letters written to the administration, there are repeated complaints of space shortage in the library, library systems not being updated, and the computer systems being out of order.

Shivansh,  a student at Faculty of Law said, “A requisition has been made by the students to get the required infrastructure. While we are nowhere close when it comes to National Law Universities as far as facilities are concerned, access to online law databases like SCC Online and Manupatra are a must for a law student to exist in this profession. Library is mostly overcrowded and there is a scuffle to get a seat, at times. We are not allowed issue, expensive publishers like Halsbury and Mulla. These are some issues we all face day in and day out. I understand how the Faculty of Law is the best place to learn if we were to take in regard return on investment.  However, that can’t be the benchmark when it comes to government universities.”

Kartik Saini, another student addressed the problems Hindi medium students face. He said, “There are not enough books and reading material especially for Hindi medium students. Students from south India sometimes face problem in understanding when teacher uses Hindi as a medium of communication in class. Apart from that, fans seem to be useless. The library lacks chairs and the ones present right now aren’t comfortable enough.”

The Faculty of Law has also failed the teachers. Many classrooms lack microphones and teachers have to bring their own required teaching material to the classes.

One can hope that these matters are addressed immediately and the University administration takes prompt action.


(With inputs from The New Indian Express)

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat Archives

Jaishree Kumar

[email protected]


The student took the teacher to Maurice Nagar Police Station for his apparently anti-national comments in context of Pulwama attack, but the cops filed a case against him.


A guest faculty member at University of Delhi’s (DU) Law Faculty was allegedly assaulted by a student, namely Devendra Barala, citing the teacher’s ‘insensitive’ statement in reference to the death of Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) personnel in the recent Pulwama attacks.

Barala, a third-year student, has claimed that on the day of the Pulwama attack, he tried to show a video of the incident to the teacher outside the classroom. According to him, the teacher refused to watch it, claiming it to be propaganda material. “The professor said why feel sad for those who are there to die,” he alleged, also saying that the teacher held the same stance the next day.

According to The Times of India, Barala said, “The teacher told me that I should not be emotional. The army-men are dying in North-East and Jharkhand as well.” He mentioned that he took the teacher to the police station for his apparently anti-national comments, and wanted to get him arrested. What happened at the station, however, was different because the cops arrested Barala instead.

Contradicting Barala’s claims, the teacher, under conditions of anonymity, said that there was no truth in his statements. “He (the student) assaulted me and then dragged me to Maurice Nagar Police Station,” The distressed teacher further added, “However, I managed to file an assault case against him.”

The teacher claims that he had told the student to not pay heed to WhatsApp videos, as they are often fake, or part of propaganda. The video that the student wanted him to see was one of the numerous others that mushroom at sensitive times, where social media should be used with caution, and only accepted after thorough verification of the facts.

The teacher has filed a police complaint and Barala received a showcase notice from Joint-Teachers’ Consultative Committee on Friday, 22nd February 2019,  to explain his behaviour. Besides, Professor Ved Kumari, Dean of the Law Faculty has assured that a committee would be made to look into the matter.

The teacher said that Barala wanted his views on the attack, to which he condemned the attack. He also informed Barala that any act of terror was unjustifiable. “We must also criticise the government,” he added, which may have instigated the student to attack him and force him to the police.
DU Beat tried contacting the authorities, but they were unavailable to comment.

With inputs from The Times of India

Image Credits: University of Delhi


Maumil Mehraj

[email protected]





Some candidates of Law Centre I alleged voter malpractice in the college elections held on 12th September. They have submitted an application regarding the same to the University.

On 12th September 2018, elections across University took place. The counting process on 13th September saw allegations of EVM tampering being raised in various places. In a new allegation, Jitender Singh, an ex-Presidential candidate of Law Centre-1 at Campus Law Faculty alleged voter malpractice and misconduct by election officers in holding the LC-1 elections on 12th September. He, along with two other candidates, Mayank Yadav and Sandesh Jha, submitted a formal complaint to the University Grievance Council.

On 12th September, Mr. Singh wrote in the application, that they noticed a case of voter impersonation of a second-year LC-1 student Amit Kumar. They also alleged a discrepancy between the turnout and the final voting figures. The Election Officer of LC-1 was informed about the bogus voting, but he offered a concession of 10 votes to Jitender Singh, which he refused, as per Mr. Singh’s application. In a Facebook post regarding the same, Mr. Singh also said that after complaining to the Election officer S.K. Singh, their cries for holding the election results until a decision was made by the University Grievance Council, were dismissed.

The application also alleged that there was gross violation of the Code of Conduct by the winning panel of Ajay Dahiya (President), Akshay Kumar (Vice President), Digvijay Singh Bisht (General Secretary), Shambhavi Srivastav (Joint Secretary), Aditya Chauhan (Central Councillor) by campaigning through social media on the day of polling. There was also the absence of any kind of camera recording and the compulsory signature of students while opening ballot boxes, which was a violation of the Lyngdoh Committee regulations.

Mr. Singh, when talking to DU Beat, said how he found out that when a member of his core team, Amit Kumar, went to vote found out that his name was already used to cast votes in the evening of 12th September. After he rejected the concession of 10 votes, they went on a protest against such malpractices on 13th September. However they have received no notice from the authorities, Mr. Singh told DU Beat. A hearing regarding the application submitted at the University Grievance Council is scheduled to be held on Monday.

Feature Image Credits: DU Beat

Sara Sohail
[email protected]

In a bizarre chain of events, the Delhi High court has ordered the University of Delhi to declare the results of the students who had been erstwhile debarred from examinations.

The verdict comes as a relief to those students, whose results had been detained by the varsity on the grounds of insufficient attendance. The University has been directed by the honourable court that the students who pass their examinations shall be allowed to continue with their courses as per the Bar Council of India rules. Considering the gravity of the situation, the University has also been directed to allow those students, who fail these examinations, to appear for the supplementary examinations.

It must be noted here that the students who had failed to meet the attendance quorum of the University, had been allowed to appear for the End Semester examinations through an Interim Order on the same case, which was received on 6th July 2018.

The University, on its behalf, had filed a Letters Patent Appeal against the interim order passed by the Single Judge Bench on 6th July 2018, stating that the interpretation of Rule 10 and Rule 18 of the Bar Council of India, which deals with the minimum attendance quorum, as drawn by the Honourable Bench, was totally different from what they actually mean. According to the University, the relief given by the honourable court to the concerned students is totally contrary to what the law dictates.

This interim order, however, had not catered to the needs of all the students. There was a batch of students who had not been allowed to appear for the examinations. This time, the concerned Bench, comprising of Chief Justice Rajendra Memon and Chief Justice V. Kameshwar Rao, has allowed those students to appear for the supplementary examinations. Also, earlier, it was proclaimed that the results shall be declared in consultation with the fact that the candidates satiate the necessary attendance quota by attending extra classes/tutorials. However, the two-judge bench, clarifying that the decision was applicable only to the “peculiar facts and circumstances of the case”, delivered a gentle riddance to the students from this requirement, under the pretext that it was not the students’ fault if the classes had not been organised by the University.

On its behalf, Delhi University has pleaded that this unprecedented decision from the High Court shall force the varsity to face dire consequences. The fulfilment of the judgement, according to the University, shall not only create complications for those pupils who had appeared before the law, but also, it shall derail the entire admission process followed by the University for its L.L.B Course, thereby, making things exceedingly difficult.

The University of Delhi was represented by Senior Advocate Arvind Nigam, while the law students were represented by Senior Advocate Kirti Uppal along with Advocates Himansh Dhupar, Ashish Virmani, Samrendra Kumar, and Rajesh Mishra.

Aashish Jain

[email protected]

With inputs from Bar and Bench

Image Credits: Dslsa

Caption:  Results of only those students who had approached the court will be released.

The University of Delhi’s Faculty of Law, on the 11th of June 2018, had announced the results for its undergraduate entrance examinations to the institution. However, within an hour of publishing it on its website, du.ac.in, the management had to withdraw the same after receiving complaints of irregularities.

Candidates who had appeared for the exams, held on the 18th of June, alleged receiving less than expected marks and many other students claimed that they were unable to find their names in the results’ list.

Notably, the online entrance test was conducted at a number of examination centres most of which are in the private sector. Significantly, this was the first time that the Faculty of Law had chosen to go online to conduct its entrance test.

Professor at the Campus Law Centre (CLC) Parikshit Sirohi told DU Beat through a phone call conversation, “If students are indeed complaining that they are unable to find their names in the results’ list, then a probability is that their biometric attendance has been skipped.” He further explained, “Even I had gone as an invigilator for the entrance examinations. Sometimes, the server faces problems while recording the biometric attendance of the candidates.”

Another Professor from the Faculty of Law, Rahul Kumar, told the DU Beat correspondent in a tone of assurance, “The University of Delhi is faithful and oriented towards the aspirations of the student community. I don’t believe the management would do anything to harm the students’ interests.” When asked to express his views on the anomalies within the system made evident by this incident, he hesitated to comment and said, “As a Professor of the institution, I’m not in a capacity to comment.”

When this correspondent tried to survey how the student community of the institution felt about the incident, many students came out strongly against the inefficiencies displayed by the administration in the past.
Chandan Karmhe, a final year law student at the institution told DU Beat, “The University administration is not only inefficient but is inflicted with apathy towards the students. This is not an one-off incident. There is some consistency in delinquency as far as the people employed in the administration are concerned.”
He went on to cite an example, “My friend was marked absent in her third-semester exam result, even after having appeared for her exam. She had to run pillar to post to get it rectified.”

When asked what he had to comment on the current mishap, he remarked, “It is absurd! How can you upload the results which can make or break careers of thousands of students without ensuring proper checks? We are in the headline mostly for wrong reasons- sometimes for paper leaks and at other times, for grave errors in the result. Unless we take strict and remedial actions, this haloed faculty will be pushed towards further decay.”

In an earlier article, DU Beat had reported on the students’ allegations of irregularities in the conduct of the same examination. Candidates had alleged that many students were allowed to cheat openly, besides complaints of technical glitches and slow Internet while taking the exam. Shilpi, one of the examinees, concluded, “This clearly shows DU cannot handle the online mode.”

The DU Beat correspondent had sent an email to the Dean of the institution Ved Kumari and had sent a copy of the same to the coordinator for admissions of 2018 Dr. Kiran Gupta.Till the filing of this report, the email seeking insight into this incident has not been responded to by either of the two.
Feature Image Credits: The Indian Express
Vaibhavi Sharma Pathak
[email protected]

The Delhi High Court, on Wednesday, asked the Law Faculty of the University of Delhi (DU) to scrap its policy of clubbing two categories.


Delhi High Court, on Wednesday, ordered the Law Faculty of the University of Delhi (DU) to fill the vacant 301 seats for the LLB course, based on the petition filed by a group of students who failed to get admission in the last academic year (2016-17), due to the varsity’s step of clubbing the 2,310 seats with 301 seats that are actually meant for the “supernumerary candidates”.

On 28th June, the court had passed an order permitting the admission of the 2,310 students, oblivious of the fact that the university had “erroneously included” the reserved seats as well.

The “supernumerary candidates” fall under a third category that includes Persons with Disabilities (PWD), Children and Widows of Armed Forces (CW) and the Foreign Nationals (FN). As reported to The Indian Express, the bench consisting of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar were quoted saying, “It is submitted that DU was required to admit 301 candidates in the reserved categories as supernumeraries over and above 2,310 seats”. It also came to their notice that this admission process has been in existence and in practice since the year 2008.

“It appears that this submission is incomplete….as the undisputed factual position placed before us is that since 2008 till 2015-16, DU was admitting 2,310 students as well as additional supernumerary candidates for the PWD/CW/FN”, the bench noted.

Furthermore, according to report, the cut-off date of 31st of August will not come as a restriction to the admission of the concerned candidates.

Feature Image Credit- The Indian Express


Shrija Ganguly

[email protected]

Putting a pause on the ongoing tussle between students and the Bar Council of India (BCI), the Delhi High Court has asked Delhi University to admit 2,310 students in the LLB course for the 2017-18 academic session.

Manmohan and Justice Vinod Goel, in an interim order, reasoned, “Don’t reduce the number of seats. Students want to study, let them study. DU has been teaching 2,310 students till now. You (BCI) decided to reduce the seats to half. We need time to decide the case. Till then let 2,310 study.”  

The bench has posted the matter for the next hearing on August 21st.

The court’s order came from a PIL by lawyer Joginder Kumar Sukhija, against the decision of the 800+ seat cuts. The petition asserted that by reducing the seats, public money, which was used to provide grant to the varsity, would not be put to optimal use. Other than that, a large number of students will be affected if the seats were reduced.

In August 2016, the BCI has asked Delhi University (DU) to admit a maximum of 1,440 students in its three centers LLB courses, and to shutdown colleges offering law courses in the evening shifts. The policy decision of shutting down evening colleges has been taken after the BCI reported that the law programmes offered in evening and night hours do not comply with rules that appropriate the quality of legal education that is imparted to students.

However, Delhi University opposed the reduction of seats for the law graduate course, on grounds that it had improved its infrastructure and increased the strength of its teaching faculty.

Earlier this month, BCI had also imposed a penalty of Rs 30 lakh on DU for not paying affiliation fees and continuing to teach without permission.

Following the seat cut proposal, many protests have been held across the campus against the proposal. While, this latest development is seen as a major relief to law aspirants, but whether or not there will be a seat cut in the next academic session will only be made clear after August 21st.


Image Credits: DU Beat

Niharika Dabral
[email protected]

Self-preservation is the law of the nature. It seems that the first year law students of Delhi University’s law faculty decided to follow nature’s law over the norms set by the University yesterday. The Campus Law Centre(CLC) of Delhi University had to postpone one of its exams of 1st year in the view of ruckus and violent atmosphere created by some students who were not provided their admit cards due to lack of attendance. The students of Law Centre I and Law Centre II protested for the fact that students of campus law centre being provided with provisional admit cards by the Prof. In Charge.

The first year students who reached Campus Law Centre to appear for their Criminal Procedure Code (Cr PC) exams were surprised to find a huge commotion in the centre along with a huge police presence. Some students who were protesting even threatened the authorities of committing suicide by jumping from the 1st floor of the building. The entire event which unfolded yesterday finds its origin in the act of the prof. in charge of Campus Law Centre, Prof. Usha Tandon who issued provisional admit to the detained students of CLC who had not been issued their admit cards due to lack of attendance. This act irked the students of the other centres who had not been issued any admit cards due to lack of attendance.

In an emergency meeting that took place among the dean, Pro vice chancellor(PVC) and the Prof in charge of the centres, it was decided that the Prof. in charges have no authority to issue admit cards, which can only be issued by the University to students who fulfil the criteria set by the Bar Council. Later, in another notice the PVC on the advice of proctor, allowed the prof. in charges to issue admit cards to students which was subject to PVC’s approval. This was met with another notice from the dean of law faculty who mentioned that she won’t be responsible if this action of the university leads to de-recognition of the degree by Bar Council later.

Later in a joint appeal to the detained students, the dean and the Prof. in charges requested them to co-operate with the decision of the University as their action can lead to derecognition of the degree of nearly 5500 students who are currently enrolled in the faculty. The exam which was cancelled will be held later.

Last year, similar ruckus forced the authorities to provide students with admit cards for which the University had to face the ire of Bar Council. “This ruckus by students who don’t attend the faculty for the entire semester is affecting the normal students” said Jaideep Panghal, a student of Law Faculty.

Although students have every right to protest, but is it just to prevent others from giving exams and coerce the authorities with suicide threats instead of attending classes?

You decide, and do tell us in the comments.


Image Credits: DU Beat

Srivedant Kar

[email protected]