You do realise "law" will be taught using a certain language, and that language happens to be English? The unfortunate truth of India is that English is the only binding link between us all when it comes to language, even if it it is not an indigenous one, because we don't have a "common/ national" language of Indian origin across the country. If classes are taught in Hindi, how do you expect certain South-Indian communities who may not be proficient in Hindi to cope? After all two of the top NLUs are located in South India, why would Hindi be the common language there? Besides, NLUs have been declared as English medium, so might as well learn the language if you're aspiring to get in, than expect them to tailor an entire syllabus to suit your convenience. This is not to mention the qualifying exam is through this mode of language as well. It isn't elitism to expect people to equip themselves with the necessary assets to fulfil their aspirations rather than gripe about "privilege" online. Matter of fact, English isn't a language whose knowledge is limited to upper classes alone anymore, everybody receives it regardless through the public education system. So your conflation of the knowledge of English with privilege and elitism is invalid.

You seem to have contradicted yourself there in your last statement. You say people who aren't proficient in the language are highly unlikely to be admitted and in the same breath acknowledge that these people struggle in the university once they get in because they have little grasp over English, implying quite obviously that these people do stand a chance to get in. You have also brought in an aspect of my original argument- that these people may not necessarily struggle to get in, but once they do, coping is hard. And the main point of entrance exams is to finally graduate with a degree from said college is it not? What is the point of getting in when you can't keep up with the course? Also, elitism? Please. Anybody from an average middle class income background has access to various resources including public schooling to educate themselves in English. My point still stands that English is the common medium of communication between most communities in India, and teaching in Hindi in colleges would put those not proficient in Hindi at a disadvantage, especially when these people hail from the very place the colleges are situated in. Even if we were to argue that while CLAT can cater to "the masses" by switching up the main mode of the exam from English to multiple indigenous languages that can be the choice of the exam attendee, it still stands that while the person may have access to the top tier law education in the country, it's dubious if he can utilise it at all if he can't seem to understand the mode in which he's being taught. With NLSIU and NALSAR (and a few others such as NUALS Kochi and NLS Tiruchi, all located in South India) both having domicile reservations, it certainly stands to reason that the South Indian community might be put in a place of disadvantage in their own homes to cater to a North Indian crowd. After all, not every South Indian has access to learn and be proficient at Hindi. They don't need to either, if they're fluent in the common medium of language or the common language spoken in that particular state. What about them then? And since when did keeping in mind the interests of other communities that might disbenefit from the arbitrary introduction of only one medium of discourse in a college belonging to a diverse country which has multiple ethnic groups, who speak multiple languages become elitism? It certainly is the opposite? You can't really draw a valid comparison between other countries and India, especially with matters pertaining to ethno-linguisitic communities where it is a fact, nay a truism, that India is a subcontinent in itself holding together multiple communities that practice multiple religions, speak multiple languages and have vastly differing traditions. How then can we compare, say Spain, where one mode of language is spoken throughout the country (albeit different dialects which don't have much variance to begin with) to India where teaching in one language might automatically put other communities at a disadvantage. Is it that they're not important enough, that in comparison to the Hindi-speaking crowds their interests aren't valid anymore? Taking my previously stated example of Spain, assuming that all candidates are native to Spain, not one community will be put at a disadvantage if Spanish is assigned as the medium in which the course will be taught in a certain law school in Spain. You can't say the same for India. The only alternative I see, is law schools taking up the tedious task of educating their students in the language to make sure they are able to keep up with the syllabus, and whether this falls under their purview or not can also be argued. Public schools certainly are doing a lot in the way of educating the poorer strata of the society in English; many people who are from typically "backward" places of India have a decent grasp of it. It is no more restricted to the urbane, metropolitan, and high class population. This is indicated by the fact that many students who are admitted each year into these top tier schools come from such backgrounds. If they were admitted, it would mean they have good command over the language since the CLAT paper has become demanding of this particular skill set? This is all excluding of course, that the student himself if he were interested, can enrol himself in the various programs that promise to make you fluent in the language, such as the famous "learn in 30 days" type books which are easily available to all, and comparatively cheap as well. The initiative must be taken up first and foremost by the student especially if he aspires to be someone and do something. Colleges are neither responsible nor accountable for a students lack of proficiency in the medium of language in which the course will be taught, nor his lack of interest to make up for it. FYI, and probably the most important of all, CLAT is annually conducted in Hindi as well. Frankly, it's you with your elitist "everybody speaks Hindi" attitude typical of most North Indians, with a major disregard to the South Indians who belong to the very states in which the top tier law colleges are located who needs to get of your high horse.

Do you have any stats to substantiate your argument that the demand for NLUs is only 20% of the total student population of India? Also if you weren't arguing for a Hindi based curriculum in NLUs exactly what is your point in asking for CLAT to be in Indian vernacular languages? Entrance tests are exams that test your competency in a subject (one of them being English), whose main end goal is to decide if you're fit for an institute or not. Will a Hindi speaking person not proficient at English be able to cope in an English medium college such as NLSIU? Let me answer that for you-no. So why would the consortium conducting the exam think that a person not proficient in the language be fit for an institute such as theirs? It isn't the responsibility of NLUs to ensure language parity either. It is merely their job to provide quality legal education, and a students prowess, or rather the lack thereof of the common medium of instruction through which the entire syllabus discourse takes place, is not their responsibility. It is the Centre's responsibility to do that. NLUs might be nationalised, but they're not a substitute for the Centre. Like you mentioned, people who do make it, struggle throughout, so the question begs- what would happen if the CLAT consortium decided to bring about a change that resulted in a candidate being able to choose the language in which they attempted the exam? Sure, more number of people will attempt, and probably more of those who aren't proficient in the English language will get in, but then what? Is my argument, which is in favour of an alternative that results in only meritorious students getting in as illogical as you make it out to be, or is it yours that assumes that all colleges have a social responsibility to fulfil a task that isn't theirs? While I might even buy into an argument that students coming from BPL families or even those keeping themselves hardly afloat might not have access or the means to learn English, it is highly improbable that a middle class family in todays day and age are subjected to the same circumstances. I will spit your own question back at you- what country do you live in to think otherwise? Is it also so illogical to believe that a highly interested student will find a way on his own to master the language? There is no dearth of English coaching centres or "how to learn" guides, many coming at highly light-on-the-pocket fees due to the sheer ubiquity of such centres. Why then should an aspiring student transfer this burden to the college? Lastly, NLUs are far more than colleges, they're prestigious institutes offering top notch legal education. They have been recognised all over the world as premier institutes, so studying in them naturally gives you international visibility. To be able to bear up with that kind of pressure that requires you to moot on an international level or even national level, requires to have mastered the common language that is English? You have requiters coming from abroad, people constantly sizing you up across the globe. Does that not require you to show some amount of competency in the language? Even if we were to make it mandatory that NLUs provide formal English education to those weak in the language, it can be comfortably assumed that they will still lag far behind those who have mastered it, and it will take them a while before they begin to even comprehend what the heavy tomes of law books have to say with their complicated legal jargon that even a person fluent in the language has a hard time understanding, let alone participate in any exchange (which is essential to the profession) with other students and faculty from the same or different colleges. A continuation of the above point- most graduates get placed in corporates (global or national) and it is no secret that these corporates require you to have a good command of English, especially because you will have to deal with international clients. What will you do at that stage then, assuming that you have passed all the above stages successfully? Surely, your appeal goes down in their eyes? So what is the point of getting a degree then, when you have don't have much value in the job market, which is the end goal of everyone? It is no more the responsibility of the NLUs to ensure accurate, country-wide representation of all language classes than it is of CLAT coaching centres aiding their pupils to crack the exam. You're still conflating the ideas of having fluency in English to privilege and elitism; those days are far bygone. For all you know, these people studied under the public school system and eventually built up on their lexicon with extensive reading or by some other means. I have known such people who hailed from places considered "rural" who have a far better grasp of the language than some people I studied with, because of their sheer will to master it. They could also be products of the RTE system which allows for pupils from backward classes to learn on par with pupils coming from better backgrounds, thus giving access to the same resources. You have assumed a lot in your argument, and yes, this isn't to say that my personal example is applicable to everybody, but let's not generalise and accuse people of "privilege" when it could just as easily be the fault of the student himself. Finally, most of the crowd at NLUs tend to be from middle class background, finesse of English be damned, and that in itself invalidates "elitism" which is only reserved for the few at the top. Most of those who do get in, hailing from the class they do, worked pretty damn hard for it, and did not have things handed to them on a platter, so I honestly don't know where you got that idea from. My question to you is this, and this comes from a genuine, deep curiosity to understand- you believe CLAT approach of progressively increasing difficulty of the paper will have a negative impact on the Hindi speaking belt, why have you not thought that South Indians who might not have exposure to the language as well might be equally affected? If not, doesn't that indicate something wrong with the "Hindi belt" and not the education system as a whole?

I also urge you to read the NLU Jabalpur case where an 18 year old boy was found hanging in his dorm room because he "felt like an outcast due to his lack of proficiency in English". This is despite the fact that he was taking classes to master it. It is in fact on this same website. Tell me would not that boy be alive now if he had never gotten in due to toughened standards. Yes, he might have never been able to pursue his dream of becoming a lawyer, but he would be alive now doing something he despised. This is an attestation to the fact that getting in doesn't always mean you have made it, you will still struggle to continue once you're inside.

Wow. It's as if you're being paid to come to the comments section here to write absolute nonsense. [...]

If the students are as good as you claim, why would they need to lobby to ensure other people don't get the jobs? Surely they would be duly recognised and preferred for their dazzling brilliance, leaving the students from the other institutes that you speak of, far behind in their dust?

Arey Bhai, why are you suddenly changing your tune? What situation of equals? You yourself said students from these places are stellar compared to others. So let the recruiters actually test all students, find these ones best of the lot and 'top quality graduates', and beg them to accept employment. Simple! And you are going a bit overboard with your adulation. Great legal minds? The ones you mentioned are decent people no doubt, but haven't achieved anything yet to be called thus.

@Bhai: One of your great legal minds had once argued that good lawyers should be shamed into refusing to defend those accused of certain crimes, because otherwise, he finds it difficult to socialize without stigma of being a lawyer being attached to himself. That might be a colourful argument, but by no means either rational or product of a great legal mind.