Two months after we had first reported about the formation of the search committee to find a new NLSIU Bangalore vice chancellor (VC), it has now published its call for applications for the much sought-after role.
The deadline for applications to the committee (of former NUJS Kolkata VC Prof MP Singh, attorney general KK Venugopal, and senior advocate Arvind Datar) is 22 April 2019, and it includes several clarifications that will lay to rest speculation about Prof Venkata Rao’s successor.
For one, the notification requires candidates to be below an age limit of 60 years. This would have disqualify Rao from seeking a third term amidst rumours that the formal VC retirement age could be extended from 65 to 70 years.
We have reached out to Rao for comment.
Furthermore, despite some initial hope amongst alumni that the standard 10-year professorship requirement could be relaxed, which would allow some younger national law university (NLU) graduates a shot at the post, the notification explicitly states that candidates must have: “an outstanding academic record with a doctorate in law and a minimum of 10 years experience as a Professor of Law in a recognised University. Experience with a reputed research and/or academic administrative organisation will bean added qualification”.
There are few NLU alums teaching in India who could meet this requirement, besides potentially NLSIU alum, ex-NLSIU assistant professor and ex-NUJS Kolkata prof, Sudhir Krishnawamy, who is currently professor of law at Azim Premji University.
There could be other potentially eligible NLU grads working in academia abroad, though some, such NUS Singapore’s well-known Umakanth Varottil, might not even clear the 10-year hurdle (according to his Linked-in profile, after leaving Amarchand Mangaldas’ partnership in 2006, Varottil has been associate professor at NUS for only nine years, since 2010).
On top of that, the question looms of how many academics from overseas would volunteer returning to the comparative academic and research wasteland of India (with all due respect), not to mention the bureaucracy and political hobnobbing that is part and parcel of any NLU VC-ship.
The final nail in the coffin of alumni’s possible hope for an academic to move from overseas is that emigree academics might currently be earning multiple times the advertised Rs 30-odd lakh annual package for the next NLSIU VC (even if taking into account the cost of living and free housing in Nagarbhavi).
But who knows, what else would one take a pay- and lifestyle cut for, if not for one’s alma mater?
That said, considering the requirements, the largest pool of applicants will no doubt come from amongst VCs of other Indian law schools.
Unfortunately, this will only put further pressure on the many other NLUs without VCs currently desperately seeking successors.
Details for the role, from the notification on the NLS website are:
The Vice-Chancellor being the academic as well as the administrative head, is expected to be:
- A visionary with proven leadership qualities, administrative capabilities as well as teaching experience and impeccable research credentials;
- Having an outstanding academic record with a doctorate in law and a minimum of 10 years experience as a Professor of Law in a recognised University. Experience with a reputed research and/or academic administrative organisation will be an added qualification;
- Should not have completed sixty (60 years) years as on the date of advertisement; and
- Applicants will be required to attend an interview at New Delhi at their expense.
Salary and Service Conditions
- The post of Vice-chancellor carries a basic pay of Rs. 2,10,000/-, DA of Rs. 25,200/-, TA of Rs. 8064 and a Special Allowance of Rs. 5000/-;
- The tenure of the Vice Chancellor shall be for a period of five years or completion of sixty-five years of age, whichever is earlier;
- The Vice-chancellor will be expected to stay at the residential accommodation at the NLSIU Campus and no House Rent allowance will be paid in lieu thereof.<
Comments
Sparsh Gupta (NLS 2015)- Rank 562 and Ateeth Sajeevan (NLS 2018)- Rank 737 find a place in the merit list.
https://www.legallyindia.com/lawschools/at-least-3-law-grads-make-civil-services-2018-exam-nujs-2-nls-20190406-9984
1. Amita Dhanda
2. Bharat Desai (Chimni's successor at JNU: https://www.jnu.ac.in/Faculty/bhdesai/CV.pdf)
3. Manoj Sinha and VC Vivekanandan (ILI Director > IIT law school Dean > Azim Premji law department dean > Nirma University honorary professor)
4. Ved Kumari from DU
5. Faizan Mustafa
Amita Dhanda and Bharat Desai are over 60 (although they may have been posed some competition to Sudhir).
Manoj Sinha does not have a CV as impressive as Sudhir's, so he will lose out if he applies.
One person who may have been competition is the VC of JGLS (who was awarded the Rhodes the same year as Sudhir) because he has a lot more admin experience. But he is not leaving JGLS, which pays him a 2 crore salary, even though NLSIU is a 1000 times more prestigious.
Thus, it's a virtual walkover for Sudhir.
Infact, currently at NUJS search committee has already finalized candidates and the same is sent across the Chief Justice of India who is the Chancellor of NUJS. Therefore, there is no scope nevertheless.
In HNLU and CNLU it is very clear that retirement age of VC is 70 and 75 respectively, therefore, he can apply there
and possibly continue beyond 75 as Prof: Lakshminath did at CNLU. He was 76 when he was asked to leave last year when students protested against his continuation and against appointment of Ishwara bhat
Given the neglect of faculty development at NLSIU over the past decade, someone like Sudhir would be a good choice to ensure proper faculty hiring and curriculum reform over the next few years. I don't know much about his NUJS stint, but he was quite responsive to students when he had taught at NLSIU earlier (2000-2002, 2005-2009). He is strict inside the classroom and expects rigour in term papers and exams. That might have made him unpopular in the short run, but that does not take away from his academic credentials.
Sudhir is demanding as a teacher, that does not make him difficult to get along with.
I agree with you broad points. Sudhir sure seems like a good bet. My personal interactions with him have been nothing but positive, and his achievements and scholarship speak for themselves. His management of the APU LLM looks very positive, for what it seeks to achieve, which is a focused, social work related LLM. The faculty there are on average better than top NLUs. But, I'm not sure how exactly it would translate when managing the 5-year course. A healthy blend of senior-core faculty and active practitioners are essential to keep the pedagogy up-to date. And there shouldn't be an exclusive focus on public/social law. To Sudhir's credit, Nigam seems to have filled that role (of scholastic diversity at APU), and now does so at law school. Let's hope those gains can continue, if Sudhir is indeed the next VC.
But, there is a concern. I have heard (on this platform and elsewhere) that Sudhir can be difficult to work with, and might alienate a lot of people (including potential practitioners who might otherwise want to take those courses). I hope this fear is unfounded. Nonetheless, it is something to consider. You might remember our disagreement over [...] and her first year course (in the comments on the other article), but if you've been following the recent mental health dialogue at NLS [...]. [...] I bring this up here and now, only because you again referred to [...]'s "positive influence" in your FB posts about the mental health issue. You may have been fortunate in that regard with her, but that's not the case with MANY hardworking and intelligent students.
I bring all this up here is because some of the other comments on this article have levelled what appears to be similar allegations against Sudhir. I don't know how accurate that is,, because all my interactions with him have been extremely positive. However, I think people should take your endorsement of him with some healthy and constructive scepticism, because you've similarly endorsed [...], one which is clearly dismantled by the widespread allegations that are now finally being openly made against her at law school now, to the point where even UGC (sarasu etc) are considering strictures.
To clarify again, Sudhir's academic credentials seem unimpeachable (unlike [...] lol). And this isn't about a tough teacher setting high standards for his course. Rather, this is about the attitude and scholastic open-mindedness that a teacher (let alone, a potential VC) at law school should embody. If Sudhir checks those essential criteria, I would be proud to have him lead our alma mater.
I have now seen far too many persons (immediate peers and current students) who will straightaway rail against teachers (or others who have authority over them) without even thinking about their own omissions or shortcomings. To give you an example from my last six years at NALSAR, I have had a few students who have barely attended 50% of classes in a semester and have come up to me seeking equitable interventions to protect them. By what standard of professional ethics am I supposed to accede to such requests. I can understand marginal adjustments for those who may have attended 65-70% of classes owing to involvement in co-curricular activities or health and family related difficulties. Similarly, I have had situations where parents have called me up crying about their children failing in subjects. All I can point out is that the answer-sheets are anonymous and a failing grade is usually given when the concerned student has not really written anything. In most cases, further enquiries usually reveal that the concerned student was simply not interested in listening to the class discussions. That could happen for a variety of reasons which are best not discussed here. However, as an individual teacher, my job is to instruct and evaluate to the best of my ability. If some students end up facing the rough end of the stick, it is their liberty to complain, but it does not take away from a teacher's professional competence.
I can't say much about the current discussions at the NLSIU campus since I am not there. There are several structural as well as behavioural reasons for why students may feel disillusioned, alienated or depressed on a residential campus. To singularly place the blame on 'academic stress' or 'demanding or rude teachers' is to miss the point by a big margin.
2) Sudhir is a difficult person to get along with. Also don't remember him taking up any substantial responsibility and fulfilling it.
3) There could be others in the race whom we don't know. Prof Venkat Rao dropped in without anyone having an inkling.
4) The list being discussed limits the discussion to potential candidates from the NLU's and DU. There would be others from other universities.
1. They are qualified and know their stuff. They expect students to do their readings, be attentive and work hard.
2. You can get free grades with some of the flunkies in the faculty, but not them,
Anyway, no one gives a shit about your whining because Sudhir is guaranteed to be the next VC, while NUJS has been in terminal decline for Bhat's 7-8 year rein + the current admin's 1 year reign, so nearly a decade. And the next VC is likely to be a TMC puppet.
Since, there were many rumors that they had record PPO offer. Could you please check their Day Zero Figures also?
Once Sudhir takes over, NLSIU should proceed with certain long-pending reforms: recruitment of alumni in the faculty, improving infrastructure, greater accountability, and a strategy to enter the QS world rankings.
Increase in age to 70 requires an amendment to the ACT. Don't know the University will go for it as the reservation for local candidates also kicks in.
Prof. Joga Rao fulfills all the requirements.
His publications are better than Sudhir's, will get along with the alumni ( which Sudhir can't) and won't raise the hackles of the existing faculty which taught Sudhir.
(:
Probably, no NLSIU alumini is going to be selected as none of the NLSIU aluminis are having 10 years plus professorship, outstanding research publications (well Rhodes and such other scholarships need not necessarily result in outstanding research out up worth publication by Oxford or Cambridge) and leadership.
It is going to be Prof: Kamala Shankaran, Prof: Nagaraj and Prof: Nandimutt who are in the race practically.
Prof: Faisan Mustafa, Prof: Vijender Kumar and Prof: Jaiswal are lookintg at NLUD
Thanks for in-depth analysis and inputs.
Besides, the people who are working in some foreign universities or in private universities were never considered by any of the search committees at National Law Schools in the past two decades. It is also because the requirement of 10 years plus service as Professor of Law is read to be from Public Universities. therefore, let us be practical and understand the ground reality.
Further, check out all the successful Vice chancellors of NLUs ranging from Prof: Menon, Prof: Ranbeer, Prof: Singh, Prof: Rao, Prof: Jaiswal, Prof: Mustafa, Prof: Saxena, and the like they are all from traditional universities and done well in National Law Schools as Vice Chancellors.
Further your point of outstanding academic does not necessarily mean possessing a degree from any NLUs or from abroad. Most of the successful Professors of Law and NLU Vice Chancellors are from the traditional background who have continuous service as Professors in academics mostly in public universities
S.D Sharma'
Vivekananda
1. M.K. Ramesh
2. T. Ramakrishna
3. V. Nagaraj
4. K M Baharul Islam (Dean of IIM Kashipur)
5. Sudhir Krishnaswamy
6. Anurag Agarwal (IIM Ahmedabad)
7. Javaid Talib (AMU)
8. Manoj K Sinha (ILI)
9. Bharat Desai (JNU)
10. VC Vivekanandan (NALSAR)
11. Kamal Jeet Singh (Himachal Pradesh University)
12. Tabrez Ahmed (UPES)
13. KC Sunny (NUALS)
14. S Surya Prakash (DSNLU)
15. GS Bajpai (NLUD)
16. Poonam Saxena (NLUJ)
This is information is from a highly placed source.
1. SKD Rao
2. Vivekanandan
3. Sudheer
4. Shashikala gurupur
5. Durgambika Patil
6. Surya Prakash Rao
7. Unknown
8. Unknown
Among these 8 SKD. Sudheer and Vivek are going to be the final 3 out of whom one will be picked by the CJI
1. Ideologically inflexible? That's usually not impossible to temper in an administrative setting.
2. A bad person? One who is unkind, petty, vindictive etc? That would be a much bigger problem.
The Search Committee merely sends a shortlist of 3 names - and yes, Sudhir's is on that list, merely by virtue of having been made a Professor a few months after he received his doctorate. An unheard of munificence by MP Singh, although Shamnad who received his professorship 4 months earlier than Sudhir in November 2008 fully deserved it.
Coming back to it, the appointment is made by the Executive Committee in consultation with the CJI. That effectively means Manan Kumar Mishra of the BCI (who controls 7 votes) and the CJI will have the final word. As Mishra has been openly canvassing his support for CJI and Mishra, anybody who believes that the clean chit to Gogoi was procedurally improper stands no chance of getting appointed. However, anybody who writes to the CJI with a copy to the BCI Chairman commiserating with how the CJI has been vilified and the institution needs to be protected would win brownie points....
It would be interesting Kian, if you were to formally ask Sudhir what he thinks of the CJI row?...
Agreed on the latter point. Per the leaked information, the judges on the ECI are UU Lalit, Shantanagouder and DY Chandrachud. I doubt if feku lobbying would amount to much before them.
1. Sudhir Krishnaswamy (Azim Premji University)
2. Shashikala Ghurpur (Symbiosis Law School, Pune)
3. Srikrishna Deva Rao (NLU Odisha)
Sudhir Krishnaswamy is the most competent person among these three but the NLSIU Executive Council has 5 faculty representatives (including the serving VC and Registrar), most of whom are likely to object to him. It will be interesting to see how far they are willing to go to block a competent and forward-looking person. The NLSIU Alumni Association and Student Bar Association need to mobilise quickly and come out in support of Sudhir. Otherwise the place will end up with another mediocre leader.
1. Attracting private funding and improving the college's financial health
2. Improving infrastructure
3. Hiring new and good professors
4. Enforcing accountability and making policies more student-friendly
5. A strategy to enter the QS and Times global law rankings.
These should no doubt be the top 5 priorities.
PS: in any case, it is quite disappointing that student groups on campus have not raised concerns regarding Sasikala's irresponsible responses to sexual harassment issues at her present job at Symbiosis. That is the real concern. I mean they can coordinate letter-writing campaigns and what-not in the CJI issue, but when it is more immediate (i.e. campus future and sexual harassment), none of them are to be found. Such misplaced priorities.