We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
What strikes me most is the decision of the Faculty of Law, University of Delhi, to adopt CLAT scores for admission to its integrated undergraduate law programme. The Faculty of Law seems to display a right-leaning tilt, extending invitations predominantly to individuals associated with right-wing ideology — from Jai Sai Deepak to Justice Pratibha Singh of the DHC.
Furthermore, I found this petition https://www.change.org/FightAgainstBirthBasedSlavery
The broader objective appears to be the attraction of students from privileged classes, followed by the subtle inculcation of a far-right conservative ideology. It seems as though the institution seeks to draw in the “cream of the crop” and gradually transform them into torch-bearers of a particular ideological vision. In other words, there appears to be a mission to influence the English-speaking upper classes and position them as carriers of an extreme ideological project.
Those who qualify the CLAT examination are often in possession of significant cultural capital typically associated with upper socio-economic classes. Such individuals are likely to occupy influential positions in the future, and there is a concern that they may function—consciously or otherwise—as vehicles for the spread of a particular ideological orientation.
In contrast to CLAT, CUET tends to draw students from vernacular backgrounds, smaller towns, and rural areas. In a realistic model of social mobility, their statistical probability of occupying positions of higher institutional power remains comparatively low.
Dr. Mohan Gopal has argued that the exclusion of upper-class OBCs from reservation would adversely affect the quality and breadth of OBC representation. Taking a similar line of reasoning, it appears that the University of Delhi has strategically chosen to attract students from English-educated upper classes, enabling the dissemination of a particular ideological orientation more effectively than if it were rooted in working-class students. The model seems to follow a top-down approach.
Historically, during the British Raj, the colonial government emphasised the education of the upper classes so that they could function as intermediaries and transmit imperial values to the broader population, including the so-called “depressed classes.” The present pattern, in structure if not in form, appears to echo that method of ideological transmission. This resembles a broader project of ideological implantation from the top down within the University of Delhi.
The Vice-Chancellor of the DU publicly questioned the acquittal and innocence of G. N. Saibaba, a man who was wrongfully incarcerated for his alleged left-leaning ideology and who died within a year of his release after spending ten years in prison with 90% locomotor disability. When a Vice-Chancellor publicly questions a decision of the Supreme Court of India, one must ask whether there is genuine respect for the law of the land, or whether such statements reflect disregard for the Constitution and the authority of the highest court.
The management of the moot court hall openly displays a Hindi commentary of Jayadayal Goyandka on the Bhagavad Gita, despite the fact that no moot court competition has ever been conducted in Hindi on the premises. On the one hand, there is an overt display of affinity toward Hinduism and the Hindi language; on the other hand, regional languages and even the official language of the Union i.e. Hindi are sidelined in practice.
These developments raise serious concerns about equality, neutrality, and the constitutional character of a public university.