Bar council approves syllabus for Maharashtra’s law entrance examination

Source:- hindustantimes.com

The Bar Council of India (BCI), which regulates legal education in the country, has largely approved the syllabus and paper pattern of the state’s Common Entrance Test (CET) for law courses, while suggesting a few changes.

State’s Directorate of Higher Education (DHE) had sent the syllabus prescribed for the previous year to the council seeking their opinion, after Bombay high court (HC) asked the state to include the council members while framing the syllabus. The recommendations of the apex body will be placed before the state’s legal education advisory committee for deliberation, and the revised syllabus will be made available to students shortly, said an official from the state CET Cell.

Last year, a student had moved the HC seeking the cancellation of the test, saying the syllabus of any paper has to be declared at least six months before the exam. The student alleged that the syllabus was issued only a couple of months before the test, giving little time to prepare. While the court refused to cancel the test, it directed the state to consult the BCI to revisit the syllabus.

According to the official, the BCI, in a letter to the DHE, said the state CET should be conducted on the lines of Common Law Aptitude Test (CLAT) — the national-level entrance test for the five-year LLB course. The apex body asked the state to add a subject — mathematical aptitude — in the syllabus, while opining that the paper pattern of CET is almost similar to that of CLAT, he revealed.

The official said it will be difficult to incorporate the changes recommended by the BCI in the syllabus this year. “We will have to form an expert committee to design the curriculum for mathematical aptitude, which will consume a lot of time. Besides, CLAT’s framework won’t be applicable for the three-year LLB CET,” he said.

Last year, the state’s first ever attempt to centralise law admissions through CET faced many roadblocks, with the entire process stretching for almost half a year. The process itself was marred by multiple litigations, persistent delays and confusion.