-

F.:

F,

TirMin of the I ool Board M f Law eld

29"'A 2014 at 11.00 a.m Room no. - onvent Ce

IGNOU" New Delhi-68

The following Members were present:

1.

2.Prof. K. Elumalai, Director, SOL, IGNOU - Chairmanprof. RGB Bhagavath Kumar, Vice-Chancelloq Damodaram Sanjivayya National

Law University, Visakh apatnamprof. Ravindra Kumar, Professor, School of Social Sciences, IGNOU

Prof. S.R. Jha, Professor, Sthool of Sciences,IGNOUDr. O.p. Dewal, Associate Professor, School of Journalism and New Media Studies ,

IGNOU6. Mr. Akshay Kumar, Associate Professor, School of Computer and Information

Sciences,IGNOU7. Dr. Suneet Kashyap, Assistant Professor, school of Law, IGNOU

8. Dr. Gurmeet Kaur, Assistant Professoq School of Law IGNOUg. Mr. Anand Gupta, Assistant Professor, School of Law, IGNOU

10. Ms. Mansi Sharma, Assistant Professor, school of Law, IGNOU

prof. Madhav Menon requested for grant of leave of absence through email due to his

preoccupation with other Commitments hence, the same was granted.

prof. V.B. Coutinho, Director, Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies' Delhi and Mrs'

Chandra Kristura Murthy', Vice-Chancellor, National Law University Cuttack (presently VC,

Central Universiq', Pondicheny) and Mr. R Venkata Ramani, Advocate, Supreme Court of

lndia, could not attend this meeting.

At the outset, the Chairman welcomed all the Members of the School Board and briefed the

important academic activities carried out after the last School Board Meeting as under'

A 5 Days Professional Development Training Programme for Advocates on "constitutional

Litigation and Human Right Advocacy" organrzed by- "IBA-CLE, NLSIU and Menon

Institute of Legal Advocac] Training was hosted by School of Law, IGNOU' New Delhi

between T8-22 SeP,2013 at IGNOU'

This workshop was attended by 40 advocates from all parts of the country' The participants

got a rare opportunity to listen to u"ry eminent speakers, including several Senior Advocates

of the Supreme Corrrt, Prof. N. R. Madhava Menon, IBA-CLE Chair in Continuing Legal

Education, NLSIU, Bangalore, Prof. M. P. Singh, chairperson, Delhi Judicial Academy', v'c'

Jindal Global Universiti & Hon'ble Justice li{adan Lokur, Judge, Supreme Court of India

also addressed the young advocates on Legal Aid and the Role of Judges and Lawyers in

."p"Jiii"g proc"d.rr"s anl enlarging access in Constitutional courts

The Director has arso informed the Members that th9 SoL continued the conduct of Legal

Awareness of Common Men in Gyan Darshan on l'tand 3'd Saturday of every month and

Kanooni Salah t"^C;;;;;;i 'o"-t:o

and 4th of every month. During the said petiod,22

programs in Gyan Daishan andl9 programs in Gyanwani respectively have been conducted'

Thereafter, the Agenda items were taken up for discussion'

-).

4.

5.

-t--

!

Item No..15.1

sB 15.1.1

sB 15.1.2

sB 15.1.3

Item No. 15.2

sB 15.2.1

confirmation of Minutes of the Fourteenth school Board Meeting

held on31't May,2013

The Fourteenth Meeting of the school Board of school of Law was held

onFriday,3lMay, 2013 at 10.00 a'm' at the Room no' 2' Convention

Centre, ]CNOU, New Delhi-110068 and the Minutes of the meeting was

circulated among the Members on 17 July, 2013'

The comments/ observations were received from three Faculty Members

of SoL viz l. Dr. suneet Kashyap srivastava r 2. Dr. Gurmeet Kaur, 3.

Ms. Mansi Sharma. The Comm"tttt/S,rgg"stions circulated along with the

agenda items of 11'|. i;lt s"ili Boardirteeting scheduled on 29th Aptil,

2014 are given inAnnexure-I.

After detailed deliberations, the Committee Members resolved as under:

The observations made by Dr. Suneet Kashyap Srivastava and Dr'

Gurmeet Kaur may be taken up for consideration as a separate agenda

item under any other item with the permission of the chair. The

observations made by Ms. Mansi Sharma involves the policy matter,

hence, the same cannot be taken up for consideration till the policy of

the University is changed. In view of the above, the original minutes

circulated on 17ft futy ZOt: stand confirmed without any addition/

modification.

The Action Taken Report on the Minutes of the Fourteenth Meeting of

the School Board held on 31't May,2013

The Action Taken Report on the Minutes of the Fourteenth Meeting of the

School Board is given below

,t

Action TakenS. No. Item No.

1 14.3.8 A three Member Commtttee was Constltuteo Io looK lntu al urs I

aspects of the following matters and suggest suitable measures- I

I

1. To enhance the enrollment in the programmes in offer at present' I

2. To initiate the process for the closure of programmes which are I

likely to remains unviable, and I

3. To suggest potential areas for development of new programmes'

The Committee comprised of Chairperson Prof. K. Elumalai, Prof.

N.R. 'Madhava Menon, Dr. Manoj Kulshreshtra, Dr' Akshay

Kumar and Dr. Suneet Kashyap (convener). The lst meeting was

held on 16th August,2013.It was suggested in the first meeting

by the Members that all faculty Members may list out the causes

for the decline in the enrollment and the same may be circulated

to the Members of the Committee for further deliberation in the

next meeting. The Members also emphasized on the importance

of conducting need assessment survey for the purpose of reaching

to the learners.

The Second meeting of the Committee was held on

4th September,2013. The Members deliberated on the reasons

for decline in detail. The final report of the Committee is yet tobe finalised as there may be a need to have one more meeting.

The Final Report will be placed before the next School Board forits consideration.

Necessary action has been initiated

The Progrbmme is currently not in offer; therefore, further action iswithheld.Phase 1 of the Programme is placed for School Board approval.r 4.1 1.5

Action taken

Actio" trket14.15.10

sB 15.2.2

Item No.15.3

sB 15.3.1

sB 15.3.2

Item No. 15.4

sB 15.4.1

The Action Taken Report on the Minutes of the Fourteenth School Board

Meeting is noted by the School Board Members.

To consider and confirm the Approval of Appointment of PaperSetters/ Moderators of the Programmes offered by SOL by SchoolBoard Members through Circulation.

The School of Law (SOL) has received a communication from the SED,

IGNOU with a request to submit a revised list of Paper Setters and

Moderators for each of the courses offered by SOL. With a view tocomply with the requirement of SED, the approval of the Members of theSchool Board of SOL for all the courses offered by SOL was obtained byCirculation (copy of the e-mail sent to all the School-Board Members ofSOL for Approval through Circulation is enclosed in Annexure-Il) and thelists of revised Paper Setters/Moderators/Evaluators/Project Evaluators forall the courses of SOL have already been circulated to all Members. Thesame were submiued for information and approval on the approval takenby circulation.

The approval taken from the Members by Circulation was confirmed andapproved in this School Board Meeting.

To consider and approve the Revision of CCP Frogramme of SOL

The Programme Co-ordinator Prof. K Elumalai submitted the proposal torevise the ACS-01 course r,vhich is part of CCP programme based on thereasons listed below:

a-

sB 1s.4.2

sB 15.4.3

Item No. 15.5

sB 15.5.1

sB 15.5.2

sB 15.5.3

sB 15.5.4

Item No. 15.6

sB 15.6.1

sB 1s.6.2

(i) ACS-01 has not yet been revised since its initial oftbr.(ii) rhe schoot "f L;;;r'*in o ,":;;;;s;i"lur ."quesrs fromIearners an d go ue mmrlii*r"r,ten ts for r.,ii, i* r t.,1, i, course.(iii) There have. beel ro1 of .n"ig.re."or."o ,"ol in ttr. consumerprotection Act, r qSo,

"rj'*;ii retated legislations.Keeping in view the above *"roT.r: tild, the phase Zero Formif*m;,fl X:er";;;dff ::;:s"r,ooieiu,at.'"on,id"rationand

3fi*#rfiJ*fl,ffliberations, approved rhe phase Zero

(i) ffi",

**-^?9,._ "l the projec t and. the course code of the

course "oo.r.'"*utns

the sarne; hence ,rt. -ruir".*'i"qui."

different(iD fi"t:-8i.*eds

to be modified/ raised so as to suit the requiremenrs of

To-o*ider and approve the pG Diploma in child Law _ phase-I

fl".lTf,ffi ffi t"="o::'::,hrtffi """;Ifi iffii"*tvastava,AssistanrForm was pr aced u"r"'.rr'"'.r,#to"*o r" ; .""rri"rii;ffii Iff jl*:ti

After detailed deliberations, the School Board Membersprosramme coordinator .rtourJ [r"n a.concept ffi;"rsrrff,:fJHil:l:;1tl"lJffJ.;t""rl.1i*,-f Til"i""r,Ji"eir,","',,J"","andrerevanceagreed to provide the same. concerned Programme co-orainutoi

The Phase Form t with due in coly)oralinn ^r:__-_,made is enclo.ea. ra"".."* r'fiuurporation of inputs on the suggestions

The schoor Board, by taking note of tle said consent by the programmeco-ordinator' has approved ti" uuo* *ferred phase-' tro.-.

To consider and tltnrnrra +t-^ r-r:form r qu(r approve the Diploma in Commercial Law - phase_I

i"1!"i,?!-:trilffi 'fi :":[,?J#Tf-Gupra,assisiantproressor,solplaced before rhe schoot ;"*d #;fJ,",i11Tte. fhe Phase-r eo- *Xroerafion and approval.

ihffi:'*::11t"-tions. the Schoor B^oard Members suggesred rhat theh";r;;#",,:T::nHufffi :i;,:ffi:r*#lij#ir"x{,f,ffi

vis-d-vislGNoUobjectives.TheconcernedProgralnmeCo-ordinatoragreed to Provide the same'

sB 15.6.3

sB 15.6.4

Item No. 15.7

sB 15.7.1

sB 15.7.2

sB 15.7.3

sB 15.7.4

The Phase Form'I with due incorporation of inputs

made is enclosed. (Annexure V)

The School Board by taking note of the said consent

Co-ordinator, has approved the Phase-l Form'

on the suggestions

by the Programme

Item No. 15.8

sB 15.8.1

ToconsiderandapprovePhase-IFormofMastersoflntellectualPropertY Law

The Programme Co-ordinator Dr' Gurmeet Kaut' Assistant Professor

proposed to offer the aforesaid programme through ODL mode' The

programme Co-o,Ai"utor informed ihe Members that the Master of

Intellectual prop"rtv ^Lu*

was offered by school of L1v in the online

modeincollaboruriorr*i,rreur.Theprogrammewasrnarketed,deliveredand managed by fyfl' nui""'aker throughiheir-onliTl leaming platform

(E_mentor). rrre rvrou;;;;." rainmaier and IGNOU has expired on 10th

october,20|2.TheLicenseAgreementofSchoolofLawlGNoUwitheUT has expired i"OltO+tZoI:. fnis online course is currently put on

hold.

The progranlme co-ordinator has informed that the 4th School Board

Meeting held on f +in n""""'U er,2007 had also approved offering of MIPL

Programme through n*i'11t -n^g"cation'

(Annexure VI'1'1) The matter

pertaining to tau,ichitf of MIPI Programme in ODL mode' instead of

online progru--J'*u-, ut.o placed il"for. previous l4thschool Board

Meeting held on if;i fufu', ZOiZ,fgr-consideration and approval and the

same was approved' (Annexure-Vl'1'2)

Keepinginviewthefactthatthecoursematerialstanddevelopedalreadyfor online MIPL ;;; on the one hand and the anticipated demand for the

same progr"-*"iil""gr, opr mode due to putting on hold the on-line

MIPL programme uvldNOU on the other, the Phase-I Form (Annexure-

VI.2) was placed t.ior" the School Board for consideration and approval'

Afterdetaileddeliberations,theschoolBoardapproyedthePhase-Ifo"* to offer MIPL through ODL Mode'

To consider and approve the t"-"t of" the Supervisors for the

Programm" rvfinp-AiO^i of MIPL (Online Prograrnme)

Dr. Gurmeet Kaur, the Programme co-ordinator MIPL online programme

submitted the following names of supervisorsJor the Programme MIRP-

bo: orHrrpl- (online Piogramme) offered by SoL'

sB 15.8.2

Item No.15.9

sB 15.9.1

sB 15.9.2

1. Mr. Pankaj Kumar,IPRAttorney and the Asst. Prof. -IPR,IIS University (Annexure-Vll. 1)

2. Dr. Anirban Mazumdar,Associate ProfwB National university of Juridical Sciences. (Annexure-vlr.2)

3. Dr. Sachiv Kumar,M.A., L.L.B., Ph.D.,Asst. Prof., Rajiv Gandhi National Law UniversityPatiala, Punjab (Annexure- VII.3)

The School Board, after the detailed deliberations, considered andapproved the names as proposed at SB 15.8.1 as supervisors for theProgramme MIRP-003 of MIPL (Online programme).

To consider and approve the Empanelment of Evaluators for theProgrammes offered by sol, for different Regional EvaluationCentres - Pune and Bhubaneswar

The Regional centre Pune and Bhubaneswar have submitted the list ofBio-data of Evaluators for specified programmes offered by School of Lawfor approval by the School Board. The concerned programme co-ordinators have verified the CVs with the qualification and recommendedfor approval.

The Director, SoL submitted the gist of the said Bio-data for considerationand approval by the school Board. The names of Evaluators along with theREC and the Course detail are given below:

\ri'

The List of Evaluators Recommended by REC and Programme Co-ordinators.-\

sB 15.9.3

Item No. 15.10 To consider and approve the Minutes and the individual Agenda Itemsof the Third Doctoral Committee Meeting held on l'tApril, 2014,

After the deliberations, the School Board consi{ered and approved theEmpanelment of the above Evaluators for the programmes offered by SoLfor Regional Evaluation Centres - pune and Bhubaneswar.

S.

No.Name Discipline Programme/

CourseRCREC

I Jnanendu Kr. Mohapatra Law ACS -01 Bhubaneswar2 Renu D. Chaudhari Law PGDIPR, CHR, CIHL PuneJ Chandra Prakash Gupta Law PGDIPR, CHR, CIHL Pune

sB 1s.10.0

sB 15.10.r

sB 15.10.2

sB 15.10.3

sB 15.10.4

sB 15.10.5

Item No. 15.11

sB 15.11.1

sB 15.11.2

sB 15.11.3

Item No. 15.12

Prof. K. Elumalai, Ph.D. Programme coordinator and Director' SoL

informed the Members of School Board that the Third Doctoral Committee

Meeting was held on l't April, 2014 to discuss the following Agenda Items

(SB 15:10.1, SB 15.10.2, 6. Sg 15.10.3) circulated along with the agenda

and Background PaPers.

To lay down the eligibility criterion lor deciding the Cut-off Marks/ Points

for inviting the appiicanti for next stage of Admission process. (SB Item

No.15.10.10 DC Item No.3.1).

To prepare and finalize the merit list of the Ph.D. Applicants for taking up

to the next stage of Admission process - July, 2014 Cycle' (sB Item

No.15.10.2, DC- Item No.3.2).

Finalisation of Ph.D. Course Work (SB Item No.15.10.3 & DC Item No'

3.3.1)

The above agenda items as well as Minutes of the Third Doctoral

Committee Meeting held on lst April, 2014 was placed for consideration

and approval by the School Board. (Annexure-Vllf)

After the detailed deliberations, the School Board approved the Minutes of

the Third Doctoral committee Meeting held on lst April, 2014 and also

approved the individual Agenda Items of the said Meeting referred above'

(SB 15.10.1, SB 15.10.2 and SB f5.10'3)

To consider and approve the Minutes of the Fourth Doctoral

Committee Meeting held on 2L't April,20L4

Prof. K. Elumalai, Ph.D. Programme Coordinator and Director, SOL

informed the Members of School Board that the Fourth Doctoral

Committee Meeting was held on 21't April, 2014 to.discuss the Agenda

Items circulated along with the agenda and Background papers.

The Minutes of the Fourth Doctoral Committee Meeting held on 21't April,

2014 corfiaining the deliberations held in the said meeting was placed for

the Consideration and approval by the School Board. (Annexure-IX)

The School Board considered and accorded approval of ihe Minutes of the

said Doctoral Committee Meeting held on 21'tAprll,20l4'

To consider dnd approve the list of candidat'es for atlmission into PhD

(Law programm") to* the July, 2014 Session. Defence of Doctoral

iroposals by the Ph.D. Appiicants. (DC Item No' 4'1)

Prof. K. Elumalai, Ph.D. Programme Co-ordinator and Director, SOL

informed the Members that the details of the Selection Process followedsB 15.12.1

-

sB 15.r2.2

sB 15.12.3

sB I5.12.4

;ilTJiP,'fi'J:#:;,#;?,:,Tij,l,:,rt,f"DoctorarcommitteeMeeting

The name of candidates calledbelow:

for personal interaction are listed

for interview under both the4.1.1):

The list of name of candidates calledcategories are listed below (DC ItemNo.

out of the 14 candidates calred for defending their research proposalsbefore the Doctorut commiu"e ,- i"^aian", ;;;.;.;ient lvide sr.no.I,J, 4, s, 6, 7, t, I!_, 12, ts a'tj ^ia W.ilid;;r;;r" absent (videsl'No'2' 9 & 10- u7-Sesn..s!a.yna,'iogq*j ,ngn i noi, ood chitranjanKispotta from the above lisq 1DC it.ri No.l.f .Z;

Based on the presentations made by the candidates on their researchfiffi*f:ij.": J*#r"*ations

_ul" by the u"_u"^'"f the DoctoralTable showing the nsme of Candidates,

leyearch Topic proposed and'8 "I;:#;tr:;.

r:;i ns/o bie rv aii"

^- *"a, nv n i id"io,ot c o mmitte e

Name of the Candidite

Manoj Kumar patel

(ii) Applicants exempted from Entranc" ,r"rin*i*Name of the Canditlate-.

Chitranjan Kispott-

Ritu ChaudharyNeeraj Kumar

Manoj Kumar patei Lack o f LawTlnls;c;Grn;;G I

Agency coordination and Wasteluland.. avoidable .^p.ndirur. ofpuDttc resources therebv.

fn"_conaiao,,!;r;:.1!!:",i,r_1,r0"

thonoe in ntte of the thesis ossuggested: "Lack of .tnter eon"rni"-n'i,"'on"r,coordination teading to auoidoble onJ *orr"trtexpenditure of public resources,, need for o ioO"iir*.r!3 co7aiaate osreed for the ,*oorii ,n|r;;:.'

,

lney.fore the topic i, n*iir;;;:;"'fu ph.D.enrollmCnt. l

Candidates Not RecommendedRes e arch ToP i c ( submitted) Ott"-oti*ttnr^arks/R ecommendatio ns of

Doctoral Committee

theS/.No. Name of the Candidate

Conc tomicile under the Indian

Constitution

7n" tntr^rrt of the Research problem has not

been spelt oul The justiJication and need for the

study isfound lacking.Therefore the tonic is not recommena4:---

Mohit Bansal

fneu i" "o "nfi\ on the scope of the study to be

conductedTherefore the topic is not recommended

2 Vaishali Abrol Cyber Crimes- A Uomparatlve Druoy

between Cyber Crimes Reporting Before

and A{ler Coming of IT Act 2000 (Socio-

fne npi" is too widefor a Ph.D. work'

Therefore the topic is not recommended'3 Narsimham Gunii ''A Critical shtdY and revte'

Public Health safeguarding and Regulatory

System in India with a special reference to

constitutional provisions& TRIPS

Agreement'in the regime of IntellectualD-^^-*, pi^h+a /TpR e\"

Tobiectives of the Research sludy have not

properly formulated-Thireforcthe topic is nol recommended'

4 Renu Sharma Offences against Marned women wlrn urc

Special reference of Domestic ViolenceA^+ .)nA<

-Univerce of the study is not iustified Hypothesis is

not properlYframedThirefore. the topic is not recommeryl!91f--

5. Pramod Tiwari Climate and Crtme ln lndla: A sruoy

special referen ce to lJttatakhand

A *t" for lhe Research Study is not made out'

The Research Ptoblem is not identifiedThercfore. lhe topic is not recommen!91!'

-

6 Shalini Saxena "The law relatlng to rnoepenoeil orrcut

in Indian Laws"- A comparative analysis'

.he challenge of ensuring equal access to

right to life for a girl child: A criticalanalvsis of female foeticide in India.

-

The scope of the study is not propetly identtJted'

Hypothesis is not ProPerlY framediierefore, the topic is not recommended'

'1. Ritu ChoudharY

Sy.ia" Ctisit a"d International Law' fne tc"pe' n*a and iusffication of the study is

not cleirly spell out. The specific obiectives ofthestudy are not ptopetly formalaled The Research

Methodologt is not ProvidedThpre,fore. the lopic is not recommended.

8. Neeraj Kumar

-fnu tnt"^."t of the Problem is not formulatedThe Research Melhodologt of the study is not

clear. Therefore, the topic is not recommended'

9. Rahul Bishnoi Women's right to property unoer Hlncru

Law: An analytical study within legal and

Social Spectrum.

10. Rashmi Singh Rana "E retgetce-of right conferring laws in

Post liberalization Era"- A study of impact

of globalization on lndividual Freedom'

fnn t*pn of lhe study is too wide for a Ph'D'

Work. Therefore, the topic is not recommended'

sB 15.12.5 The brief synopsis on

candidate recommendedbelow:

the research topic proposed and CV of a

for PhD. Programme in Law is as detailed

After detailed deliberations, the School Board apploved the name of Mr'

tvt*oj Kumar Patel, as recofirmended along with the topic finalised and

also the names of candidates not lecommended by the Doctoral

Committee.

Name of the Candidate nexure X.l SYnoPsis on the

proposed research toPic

Annexure X.2 Brief CV

;Lack of Int"t Governmental agency coordination

leading to avoidable and wasteful expendituie of

public resources" need for a Model Law

sB 15.12.6

Item No. 15.13

1s.13.1

sB 15.13.2

sB 15.13.3

ltem No. 15.14

sB 15.14.1

sB 15.14.2

ToconsiderandapprovethePanelofExaminersfortheEvaluationofpfr.U. - Thesis (Ms. Preeti Gupta) (DC Item No' 4'2)

Prof.K.Elumalai,Ph'D'ProgrammeCoordinator&Director'SOL'informedtheMembersthattheResearchSupervisol,Plof.SrikrishanDevaRao has forwarded a List of External Examiners for Evaluation of Ph'D'

thesis of Ms. preeti b"pi". sol,submitted the same to Director, Research

Unit on the same 6 ffi;f December, 2013 the Director (Research

unit) sent back thel; note with the remarks "May please be clarified

.^irr"rr"r-irr. pu3"l ;;, t*; approved by the School Board of sol. If not,

same need the apprwui ortn" s"t ool Board of SoL". The items related to

phD programme ,r."J rrr" approval of the Doctoral Committee before

taking the same to the School Board'

ThePanelofEvaluatorsprovidedbytheSupervisor/ResearchGuideofthecandidate (prof. sri-r.irr.,"a Deva Rao) was placed before the School

Board d,rty.."o*-"nded by the Fourth tjo.toti Committee Meeting held '$

on 21,1April, ZOi fol ns consideration and approval (DC Item No' 4'2'2)

and the same was approved' (DC Item No' 4'2'3)

The School Board, after discussion, recommended that the said panel of

EvaluatorsprovidedbytheResearchGuideandapprovedbytheDoctoralcommittee @c riem'No. 4.2.3) be approved for evaluation of the Ph.D'

thesis of Ms. Preeti GuPta'

ToconsideranddecideontheCourse.workExemptionclaimedbyMr.Rahul verma and Mr. saji Mathew, ph.D. scholars. (request received

from the Research Scholars) (DC Item No' 4'3)

ThebackgroundbehindcourseworkexemptionclaimedbyMr.RahulVerma and Mr. s+ itn"ifr.w ph.D. Scholars (1u"" 20_13 batch) was placed

before the Founh Doctoral Committee-tvt""tittg held on 29th Apr\l' 2014 'and the same is incorporated in the Minuies of the said Doctoral

Committee Meeting' (DC Item No' 4'3)

The Doctoral Committee recommended as under:

(i)TherequestmadebyMr.RahulVermaandMr.SajiMathewmayb. u.".ptJ urra u."traingly exemption from the completion of 4-

credit Course work may be granted'"

(ii) rn" ,"-Jring candidat" lut, Rakesh Kumar may be requested to

compteteiheto*r. work of 4- credits by making two seminars

Presentations' +

Afterdetaileddeliberations,theschoolBoardhasapprovedtheaboverecommendations made by the Doctoral CommitteesB 15.14.3

t0

Item No. 15.15 To consider and approve the First Progress Report submitted by1.Mr. Rahul Verma, 2. Mr. Saji Mathew and 3. Mr. Rakesh KumarResearch Scholars Ph.D. Programme of SOL' July' 2013 Cycle (DC

Item No. 4.4)

sB 15.15.1

sB 15.15.2

sB 15.15.3

sB 15.15.4

sB 15.15.5

sB 15.1s.6

ltem No. 15.16

Director (SOL) and Programme Coordinator (Ph.D. Programme - Law)has informed the Members that the First Progress Report of the following3 Ph.D. Research Scholars who have joined the PhD Programme in Law inJuly, 2013 Cycle(DC ltem No.4.4.1"), were submitted to the School withthe approval of Research Guide.

1. Mr. Rahul Veima (Enrl. No. 138000823) for August,20T3 to Jan.,

20! 4 period- (Annexure-Xl.1)2. Mr. Saji Mathew (Enrl. No.138000934) for July, 2013 to Jan.,2014

period- (Annexure-Xl.2)3. Mr. Rakesh Kumar (Enrl. No.138000941) for August, 2013 to Jan.,

2014 period- (Annexure-Xl.3)

The above three progress reports were placed for consideration and

approval of the same by the Doctoral Committee (DC Item No-4.4-2).

Though, the above scholars were admitted into Ph.D. programme for July,

2013 cycle, the candidates received the letters for admission in August,

2013.In view of the above they have submitted the progress report for the

period August, 20 13 -J ant nry, 20 I 4.

With a view to bring uniformity in the submission of the Progress Report,

the Ph.D. programme Co-ordinator suggested that the above Progress

Report submitted may be treated for the period July,2013 to December,

20h. The Fourth Doctoral Committee meeting held on 2l't Aprll, 2014

accepted the said suggestion and recommended for approval of the same.

(DC Item No.4.4.3)

The said recommendation of the Fourth Doctoral Committee was placed

for the consideration and approval by the School Board.

After detailed discussion and deliberations, the School Board

recommended for the approval of the Progress Reports of the above

candidates Mr. Rahul Verma, Mr. Saji Mathew and Mr. Rakesh Kumar forthe period July,2013 to December,20l3.

To consider and approve the names of Examiners/lVloderators/PaperSetters and Evaluators for the Course Work of Ph.D. Programme.(DC Item No. 4.5)

Before July, 2013, the Course-work for Ph.D. Programme in Law(Category A) was not made compulsory. However, Course-work was

prescribed for the students registered for Ph.D. Programme in Law forJuly, 2013 batch onwards. (DC Item No.4.5.1).

sB 15.16.1

ll

sB 15.16.2

sB 15.16.3

sB 15.16.4

6.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

t6.

Inviewoftheabove,itisnecessalytohavePaperSettersAvloo.rutorrln*aminers and Evaluators for the course-work of

ph.D. programme ili; informed the ph.D. Programme co-ordinator.

Thisitemwasplacedbefore,anddiscussedintheFourthDoctoralCommitte" Meeting held on 21't April' 2014'

TheFourthDoctoralCommittee,afterdeliberationsrecommendedthefollowing names ior f,"u*i*rs/ Moderators/Paper Setters and Evaluators

for the course wdrk of ph.D. programme in Law. (DC rtem No.4.5.2)

1. Prof. B.T. Kaul, Law Centre-Il, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi,

Dhaula Kuan, New Delhi-21'','"

;3 prof. Manjula Batra, Dean, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi'

3'.Prof.(Mrs)RoseVarghese'FormerDeanFacultyofLaw"Jamia

frh--\ 5.1

8.

9.

Millia Islamia, New Delhi'

Dr. Rajan Vafghese, Faculty of Law' Law Centre-Il' University of

Delhi, bhaula Kuan, New Delhi-21'

Dr. R.G.B. Bhagawath Kumar, Vice-Chancellor' Damodaram

S*3irruyyuNationalLawUniversity,Pedawaltait'Visakhapatnam-53001 7.

Dr. Usha Tandon, Professor-in-charge' Campus Law Centre' Delhi

UniversitY, New Delhi'

7. prof. Kamla shankaran, campus Law centre, Delhi University,

Delhi.

Prof. Sri Krishna l)eva Rao, National Law University' Delhi'

Prof.K.Elumalai,DirectorandPh.D.ProgrammeCoordinatoritu-), School of Law, IGNOU, Maidan Garhi' New Delhi - 110068'

l0.Dr.SuneetKashyap,AssistantProfessor,SchoolofLawIGNOU, <.)Maidan Garhi, New Delhi- 68'

Dr. Gurmeet Kaur, Assistant Professor' School of Law' IGNOU'

Maidan Garhi, New Delhi- 68'

Dr. Anand Gupta, Assistant Professor' School of Law' IGNOU'

Maidan Garhi, New Delhi- 68'

Ms. Mansi Sharma, Assistant Professor' School of Law' IGNOU'

Maidan Garhi, New Delhi- 68'

Dr. Mohan Rao Balla, Professoq School of Law' Christ University'

u*gulo,"(E-mailrequestforRelistrationasExternalResearchi"p3*ieot/Adj udicatoi - "opy

enclosed)i'

Prof. Vijaya Kumar, National Law School' Bangalore

Prof.V.Nagraj,ViceChancellor'NationalLawUniversity'Bhubaneswar.

12

Item No. 15.17 Tb consider and approve the Curriculum for the Course Work andEvsluation Methodologt for Ph.D. Programme offered by SOL fromJuly, 2014 Cycle onwurds. (DC Item No. 4.6).

sB 15.16.5

sB 15.16.6

sB 1s.17.1.

sB 15.17.2.

sB 15.17.3.

The above list of names as recommended by the Fourth Doctoralcommittee Meeting held on 2r't April, 2014 was placed for theconsideration and approval by the School Board.

The School Board of SOL, after detailed discussion and deliberations haverecommended that the said panel of Examiners/Moderators/Paper Settersand Evaluators for the course work of ph.D. programme be approved.(DC ltem No.4.5.3).

However, the Evaluation Methodology of the ph.D. course work was nottaken up during the said Meeting; hence, the same was taken up fordiscussion, consideration and approval in the Fourth Doctoral commirtteeMeeting held on 21'tApril, 2014. (DCItem No.4.6.2)

The followingNo.4.6.3)

Methodologies were discussed. (DC Item

The curriculum for course work and Guidelines for allotment of coursework for Ph.D. Programme in Law was finalised and approved in theThird Doctoral committee Meeting held on l't April, 2013. (DC ltem no.3.3.1 & DC Item No.4.6.1).

1. TEE may be conducted for the following two courses:

(i) Course Work 1:Research Methodology - (S Credits) _ 100 Marks

(ii) Course Work 2:(a) constitutional Law of India - (4 credits) -.50 Marks(b) Jurisprudence and Legal Theory - (4 crediis) - 50 Marks

2. Course Work 3 (Optional):In the case of course work 3, the candidates may be asked to make atleast two Presentations/Seminars in any oo. of the areas ofspecialization specified in Annexure (xlr). Each presentation willcarry 50 Marks equivalent to 04 credits, thus totaling loo v*k, and gCredits.

3. Course Work 4:In the case of course work 4, the candidate riiay be asked to make atleast two Presentations/ Seminars in the u..u oi the Research topicchosen by the candidate. Each presentation will cany 50 Marksequivalent to 04 credits, thus totaling 100 Marks and g credits.

This item was placed for consideration and approval before in the FourthDoctoral Committee Meeting held on Zt'tRprii, 2014.

sB 15.17.4

l3

sB 15.17.5

sB 15.17.6

sB 15.17.7

Item No. ts.lg

sB 1s.r8.1

sB 1s.l8.2

sB 1s.1S.3

sB 15.18.4

sB 15.18.5

After detailed deriberations, the s{d Fourth Doctoral committee[TEffi*"*"}:;X] *trovai orth" uuou" p."po,uiio. rtem No.4.6j

The above recommendation made u1J3cto1{ Committee was praced forthe consideration *o upprou;fi;"t}ie School Board.

The school Board after deta'ed discussion and deriberations, haverecommended for the approval of the above E"uruuti"i'Methodorogy fori,13.t":%il|" on.''i Lv-'6;?"* ,"ir. )oio"8v.r. onwards (Dc

Any other matter with the permission of the ChairDiscussion on comments/observations

r_eceived from Facurty Members;1,1"iff;:$;;:o:*"d;;6;#;;s of schoor;;il Meeting herd on

As suggested bv the school Board Me3b3s vide SB Item No. 15.1.3 the

t"',:il9:tl;"":n:fi;;;f il:t;;:t"t"ou"t,r-M;#;,ingenerarandup for air.usion^;; i"::::jt'-Yl*"et Kaur in particulai*ur tut"ipermissionofthernXi.u separate item undet any.i,h"; item with the

on perusar of the observations made bg 'rq

Faculty Members referredabove, the Members of the S"fr""f loard p"ni"irf".fi the External

xxT :?T "f,*#i"" " b' ;i;." i,"a" Cv,ff #;}"urty Mem b ers

t::,,,, " #;;d :":ilT d;?:: ;ix*i: #, J i,* ;j:l*t ;

xi :fcomments/observations which ur" p"rrJ"ul in nature.

5

It was further suogested that the Faculty Members shourd keep the growth.devetopment ani' interesr-Jirr""i.-n""r ;n ,inJ?iir. making anyobservation & views and taking ani decisio; 0.".m", to the activitiesunderraken bv the. Sch""{ r;n;,h. illi;ffiil:t or one raculrvbecoming the prosramme co-ordini*.* p;;d;;? w"tt as courslco-ordinator of ali the .ou*"r"oiir,.' r,1to rrogru?ilr;" ;;, cerrifi cate orDiploma or Masters course should u" airpr*.?,"ii, ,r"." it is regarded asone of the stumbling block "g;; Jo'ril.tirr. effort.

In this regard. ,h: Director, ,O, ,:,r**"rr"d ,rhu,, henceforth. theProgramme co-ordinaror ;;; ""Yr" rr,.--_"ri ;::;_," the coursecoordinator of one course of the said programme, in"the case of certificatecourse' and two courses in the il-J{ Diploma p.ogru--" and so on.The Faculty Members other th*-r.lgramme coordinator of the saidProgramme mav set associateJ;nh ;, said program-" u. course co_ordinators. This n"rincipr" n""Jr',"'u. . r"'";";"i';;i'ii" e.ogrammeslaunched by the si"ttoot, rr"r."r"nrr, ti ,rri, trirocess; .u".y Fu"ulty of SoL

1

l4

Itt(-

i

l

tI

t,

sB r5.8.6

sB 15.18.7

sB 15.18.8

sB 15.18.8

will have involvement and commitment in each and every plograryeoffered by SOL.

The School Board Members have after deliberations, have accepted as

well as approved the above suggestion made by the said Members .andDirector, SOL.

With regard to the observation made by Dr. Gurmeet Kaur, for the offer ofMIPL course without reference to any specific period, the Director, SOL

and the Chairman School Board stated that it is not desirable to approve

the offer of the qourse without prescribing any time limit.

The Exiernal Board Members unanimously.agreed to the suggestions made

by the Director to specify the time frame within which the process to offerthe course should be completed. The Committee Members, however,

suggested that the time frame presuibed should be made more realistic bythe School Council/School Board and not by the concerned

FacultylProgramme Co-ordinator.

The School Board Members after deliberatiotl5, approvedsuggestigns made by Members and the Director, SOL.

The Meqting ended with the vote of thanks to the chair.

'ii

the above

***>t*

I'i.lr:',.lixl t1 t' !',ti 11-f- luu",rt'l;)\.. .1

!, i r -r rlr'v f' i-fu41)r'';*1'( i:L\,',1{ 1o*,='l , {"{1-

15