There have been many queries about pursuing a Ph.D. in Law in India. Here's some data:

According to the NIRF 2023, here are the law schools ranked for research:

IIT KGP SOL 80.11

NLSIU 71.85

WBNUJS 42.71
NLUD 38.42
GNLU 38.16
NALSAR 36.11

IIT KGP already outranks NLSIU by a clear margin. Pursue a Ph.D. in any of either WBNUJS, NLUD, GNLU, or NALSAR at your own risk. In addition, IIT KGP SOL is part of a larger IIT KGP ecosystem that enables interaction with other schools/departments/disciplines making possible some exciting research problems (when compared to state NLUs that are stand-alone law schools with a very limited perspective). All top law schools in the world are part of a larger university for a reason.

This is not accurate representation of facts. It has already been established in public that IIT KGP SOL's figures piggyback on the original IIT's numbers, infra, budget and publications. It is natural for engineering and stem publications to be higher in number and more suited to the NIRF format of ranking. Moreover, a lot of data also exist that questions over-reliance of NIRF and other ranking authority on SCOPUS publications for determining quality, which is leading to predatory and paid journals indexed in SCOPUS. The trend is more apparent in science and tech, but also exists in law. This is not to say that the IIT KGP SOL does not have good policies and incentives in place for encouraging research and publications. They do. However, NIRF has time and again proven itself to be incapable of reflecting the real picture and story of the Indian institutions, chiefly because of their faulty methodology and no verification policy.

1. No, it is you who are unaware of how the NIRF data is being presented. As someone who has seen IIT KGP's submission, I can vouch for the fact that the law school is using main IIT's numbers in a fashion that is quite common among other law schools that are part of bigger universities too, but not accurate or ethical.

2. I have been to IIT KGP's law school multiple times. They are yet to gain any noticeable benefit of the kind that you refer to. The IIT faculty and students don't consider the law faculty/students as their equals even. There is little to no collaboration that takes place.

3. If an institution remains less known even after a decade, then that is by no means an indicator of its excellence. It means that it has not achieved anything that it should be known for.

4. This is your opinion, there is no fact associated with it. Plenty of good legal research and publications have emerged from these places. Comparing those to STEM universities and their research is foolish and only done by ignorants who fail to appreciate the difference between the disciplines.

5. Agreed.

6. Agreed, with the reservation that private universities like Ashoka or even Jindal use personal network of the upper echelon to attract such funding, not by any specific demonstration of excellence. That's the private v. public divide. Public universities be they state or central also have a lot of red tapes to go through for accepting private funding. Should the scene be improved? Obviously yes. Does that mean that the private universities are using such extra funding to produce amazing research? Not really. All the parties including the funders should therefore introspect in this regard.

7. Agreed. Multi-disciplinarity seems to be the future. That does not mean that universities should randomly open new disciplines without thinking about synergy, viability and expertise related issues. A knee jerk response to UGC directives which often are all about show and no substance would be unwise.

Bottomline: What you mentioned in the earlier 7 points do not logically lead to that conclusion, so it is clearly your personal agenda. It is not as if that the so-called national universities that you refer to that are offering law at this stage are doing a good job at all, be it undergrad/postgrad teaching or quality legal research, or attracting private funding. If you are saying that the centre will always keep funding those, then that's also an assumption, countered by the reduced budget for higher education, elimination of fellowships etc.

1. Here is the published IIT KGP SOL data sheet from NIRF (https://www.nirfindia.org/nirfpdfcdn/2023/pdf/Law/IR-L-U-0573.pdf). It does take a genius to see that this is specific to IIT KGP SOL, not the entire IIT KGP. To assume, that IIT KGP will not realize this is foolish. They know what they are doing.

2. Such differences exist even among engineering departments. For E.g. CS thinks they are superior to civil or mechanical. These are meaningless comparisons done by juveniles.

3. Be patient. Innovation is a new idea in India. Given the fact that SOL's focus is on IP Law, it is bound to take some time to become mainstream. That said, SOL is building a focus area and a niche that state NLUs have failed to do (even the older ones). They are ramping up the intake (for money) and diluting quality.

4. Already covered in bullet 1. All points here are about IIT KGP SOL. Comparing state NLUs with the larger IIT KGP is like comparing an asteroid with the Sun. The point is about comparing research culture, not comparing subjects (like Law with STEM).

5. OK. Noted.

6. The point is no one has stopped state NLUs from tapping into their so-called alumni for grants and funding. But they are unsuccessful in doing so. The fact that Ashoka and Jindal can do this is their credit, and they don't need to be apologetic about it.

7. That is for State NLUs to decide and tread carefully. At this point, they are being careless and adding new disciplines rampantly.

Bottomline: When state NLUs are plagued by inefficient administration, erratic funding, state government indifference, a massive increase in intake, lack of academic leadership, and domicile reservation, among many other things - where is the time to focus on research?

1. It is now clear that you don't know the first thing about how NIRF works, based on multiple responses from you across threads. This document proves nothing. If SOL claims main IIT's research projects on their own, then there is no cross verification that NIRF does. In fact, it's easier in their case because the money is routed through the same fund. I am fully aware of the funding pattern and research that emanates from IIT KGP's main body as well as SOL.

2. May be juvenile, but it still has not led to any real collaboration. So regardless of the reason, the outcome remains.

3. SOL's IP law focus is on pen and paper only. They don't have a single well known IP faculty and the engineering faculty don't even consult them for patent applications and TTAs that come out of IIT KGP. Why don't you check how many of their grads are hired every year by main IP firms like Anand or Saikrishna etc? That will give anyone a realistic idea about how prestigious the department is in the eye of the industry. Also, what innovation?

4. Once again, debunked already. Can you name any credible research output from IIT KGP's SOL as compared to the multiple legal papers and projects that happen in NLUs? Just the number does not mean anything, where is the output?

6. NLU alumni are hardly the industrialists who provide grants. I take your point that NLUs can do better in this regard. Ashoka et al need not be ashamed of their network, the question is what research have they or Jindal produced till date with all that money? There are many faculty in Ashoka who have instead been involved in controversies like plagiarism, research retraction etc.

7. No argument there.

Bottomline: The issues that you highlight are mostly the private versus public debate. Even central universities struggle to do the same things. When is the last time a BHU or a DU received crores of donation from private parties despite having alum capable of doing so? The private universities on the other hand are encouraging research in order to hack rankings and get admission fees as a result, hence they tend to focus on quantity rather than quality. This is a matter that's already being highlighted by academics who are working in the relevant domains, including bibliometric analytics and research culture review.

You have assumed that IIT KGP is falsifying data. That in itself is a serious allegation you make just to prove your point. That's a new low and the onus is on you to prove it. As you say, if falsifying data is so rampant in the NIRF, state NLUs can also do the same. So in reality their scores must be even lower than the dismal ones currently shown.

Once you base your entire argument on IIT KGP falsifying data, this is a dead discussion. To assume that an institution like IIT KGP is falsifying data (year after year) and no one noticed it is laughable. I would rather believe IIT KGP than you. After this whatever you say does not matter. As someone already commented - the bottom line is that IIT KGP SOL scores the highest in research in the law category and that does not change. State NLUs can remain in their la-la-land and state of denial while the sand shifts right under their feet.

I did not assume it, I am aware of it. Many other participating universities have also done the same and similar questionable techniques that are coming to light every day. Are you honestly arguing that if one participant is submitting data without verification, others should do that too in order to preserve ranking? If yes, then we can no longer engage with each other, since your ethical standard obviously varies from mine. Nor was my entire argument based on IIT KGP's data, you are merely trying to say that to suit your narrative despite having gone through point-by-point arguments. I don't really think anything positive can emerge from any further conversation with you, so I'll withdraw now. You may feel free to keep airing your opinion, I have said what I had to and would let the readers judge the merit behind the two positions.

That is a ridiculous argument. Do you have any evidence of me having advocated or championed NIRF data or ranking anywhere? For the sake of disclosure, my undergrad and postgrad law degrees are from abroad, so I don't have any partiality towards any of the Indian law universities in that regard. Moreover, what race? NIRF itself reveals that there are only two central universities out of the top ten places in law, Jamia at rank five and IIT KGP at rank nine. So clearly, these places are not even recognised as the best even by NIRF.

Yet, I would consider NIRF more credible than some random person saying otherwise. Secondly, IIT KGP can be relied upon not to falsify data. They have a reputation to protect and don't need to indulge in such cheap tactics as private universities. Your allegation (about IIT KGP) has no credibility.