Judgment on NREGA Irregularities and Corruption in MGNREGA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.645 OF 2007


Centre for Environment & Food Security ... Petitioner

Versus

Union of India & Ors. ... Respondents




ORDER


The framers of the Constitution, in the Preamble to the

Constitution, guaranteed to secure its citizens justice, social,

economic and political as well as equality of status and opportunity

but the `right to employment' was not incorporated in Part III of the

Constitution as a Fundamental Right. By judicial pronouncements,

the courts expanded the scope of Article 21 of the Constitution of

India and included various facets of life as rights protected under the

said Article despite the fact that they had not been incorporated by

specific language in Part III by the framers of the Constitution.

Judgments of this Court in the cases of Olga Tellis v. Bombay

Municipal Corporation [(1985) 3 SCC 545] and Narendra Kumar
2

Chandla v. State of Haryana [(1994) 4 SCC 460] expanded the scope

of Article 21 and held that `right to livelihood' is integral part of the

`right to life'. Taking cognizance of the stark reality that majority of the

Indian population (about 76%) is residing in rural areas and

unemployment was the greatest challenge before any State or the

Central Government, the Parliament decided to enact a law to

provide rural employment to restricted persons as stated in such law.

This resulted in enactment of the National Rural Employment

Guarantee Act, 2005 (for short, `the Act'). As per the preamble of the

Act, it was an enactment to provide for enhancement of livelihood

security of households in the rural areas of the country by providing at

least hundred days of guaranteed wage employment in every

financial year to every household whose adult members volunteer to

do unskilled manual work and for matters connected therewith and

incidental thereto. Even the object and reasons of this enactment

demonstrate that objective of the legislation is to enhance the

livelihood security of the poor households in rural areas and the

Government including the State Government was required to prepare

a scheme to give effect to the guarantee proposed under the

legislation. Another paramount feature of the Act was that if an
3

eligible applicant is not provided work as per the provisions of this

legislation within the prescribed time limit, it will be obligatory on the

part of the State Government to pay unemployment allowance at the

prescribed rate. This Act was to extend to whole of India and was to

come into force on such date as the Central Government by

notification in the official Gazette may appoint. This Act was later

amended by Amending Act 46 of 2009 (w.e.f. October 2, 2009) and

titled as `Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee

Act, 2005'.


A Constitution Bench of this court in the case of Secretary,

State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi [(2006) 4 SCC 1], while dealing with

the question that the persons appointed under the provisions of the

Act would be entitled to regular appointment, rejected the claim of the

Respondents for regularisation and made certain significant

observations which read as under :

"51. The argument that the right to life
protected by Article 21 of the Constitution
would include the right to employment cannot
also be accepted at this juncture. The law is
dynamic and our Constitution is a living
document. May be at some future point of
time, the right to employment can also be
brought in under the concept of right to life or
even included as a fundamental right. The
new statute is perhaps a beginning. As things
now stand, the acceptance of such a plea at
4

the instance of the employees before us
would lead to the consequence of depriving a
large number of other aspirants of an
opportunity to compete for the post or
employment. Their right to employment, if it is
a part of right to life, would stand denuded by
the preferring of those who have got in
casually or those who have come through the
backdoor. The obligation cast on the State
under Article 39(a) of the Constitution is to
ensure that all citizens equally have the right
to adequate means of livelihood. It will be
more consistent with that policy if the courts
recognise that an appointment to a post in
government service or in the service of its
instrumentalities, can only be by way of a
proper selection in the manner recognised by
the relevant legislation in the context of the
relevant provisions of the Constitution. In the
name of individualising justice, it is also not
possible to shut our eyes to the constitutional
scheme and the right of the numerous as
against the few who are before the court. The
directive principles of State policy have also to
be reconciled with the rights available to the
citizen under Part III of the Constitution and
the obligation of the State to one and all and
not to a particular group of citizens. We,
therefore, overrule the argument based on
Article 21 of the Constitution."


Thus, in the present petition, this Court has to examine the

relief claimed within the provisions of the Act and the principles of law

stated by the Court in the referred judgments.


The present writ petition had been instituted by Centre for

Environment and Food Security for issuance of appropriate directions

to the respondents (Union of India and all the States were impleaded
5

as respondents) for formation of appropriate schemes and proper

utilization of funds allocated for the said purpose and to achieve the

object of the Act. The petitioners claimed to have carried out a

survey, copy of which is annexed as `Annexure-A' to the Writ Petition

showing that neither the schemes framed under the provisions of the

Act nor the provisions of the Act are being properly implemented. The

funds allocated are also not being properly utilized. In fact, the

allegation is that the funds are being siphoned by corrupt officials and

officers, thereby, denying lakhs of poor people their fundamental right

to livelihood. It was, thus, prayed that the Court should issue

appropriate directions to ensure proper and equitable functioning of

the Act and the scheme envisaged thereunder. Further, they prayed

that social audit of all activities undertaken and executed under the

auspices of the Act and the schemes made therein should be

conducted properly and the information in this regard should be

posted on the website. The Court should also formulate some

guidelines for paying the workers their wages in a bid to reduce the

exchange of cash to a minimum and to ensure that transfer of funds

to the workers is through a safe and easily traceable route. Besides

praying for some other reliefs, prayer is also made to order CBI probe
6

or thorough inquiry by a special commission of inquiry appointed by

the Court in the scam brought out in the said survey, particularly, with

reference to Orissa.


Before, we proceed to examine the response of the

respondents and consequential directions that the Court should pass,

it will be necessary to examine some of the relevant provisions of the

Act. The Act mandates that the Central Council and State Councils

should be constituted in terms of Sections 10(1) and 12 of the Act.

Chapters II and III deal with guarantee of employment in rural areas,

employment guarantee schemes and unemployment allowances.

Section 3(1) casts an obligation upon the State Government to

provide to every household, whose adult members volunteer to do

unskilled manual work, employment for not less than one hundred

days of such work in a financial year in accordance with the scheme

made under the Act in such rural area in the State as may be notified

by the Central Government. Section 3(4) further requires that the

Central Government or the State Government may within the limits of

its economic capacity and development, make provisions for securing

work to every adult member of a household under a Scheme for any

period beyond the period guaranteed under sub-section (1), as may
7

be expedient. In terms of Section 4, every State Government shall,

within one year from the date of commencement of this Act, by

notification, make a scheme for complying with the provisions of

Section 3. Proviso to this Section requires that until any scheme is

notified by the State Government, the Annual Action Plan or

Perspective Plan for the Sampoorna Grameen Rozgar Yojna (SGRY)

or the National Food for Work Programme (NFFWP) shall be deemed

to be the action plan for the scheme. It is obligatory on the part of the

State to provide in the scheme the minimum features specified in

Schedule I. Section 6 carves out an exception to the provisions of

the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and the Central Government has

been empowered to specify, by notification, the wages different than

that Act which shall not be at a rate less than Rs.60/- per day.

Section 7 is another important provision of the Act which requires that

where an applicant is not given employment within 15 days of the

receipt of his application seeking employment, he shall be entitled to

receive daily unemployment allowance. This allowance shall cease

on attainment of the conditions stated in Section 7(3). Under Section

8(1), obligation is placed on the Programme Officer that if he is not in

a position to disburse the unemployment allowance, in time or at all,
8

for any reason beyond his control, he is required to report the matter

to District Programme Coordinator and to even display the same on

the notice boards. The Legislature, in its wisdom, has opted not to

leave the matter at that stage but have made a provision where the

State Government, under Section 8(3), is required to take all

measures to make the payment of unemployment allowance to the

concerned household as expeditiously as possible. Section 9

declares the circumstances where a person would be disentitled to

receive unemployment allowance in certain cases. They are very

restricted circumstances like where he does not accept the

employment provided, does not report for work within fifteen days of

being notified by the Programme Officer and continuously remains

absent from work without obtaining a permission from the concerned

implementing agency for a period of more than one week or remains

absent for a total period of more than one week in any month. Thus,

the scheme of the Act clearly contemplates a statutory obligation

upon the State and the concerned departments to ensure due

compliance of the scheme framed and, in absence thereof, to ensure

that the provisions of the Act are adhered to. The object of the Act is

clear that the Legislature, in unequivocal terms, has expressed its
9

intent to ensure employment and payment of allowances to the

respective household and the exception is primarily founded on the

unwillingness of the recipient to work.


The functions of the Central Council have been spelt out in

Section 11 while that of the State Councils in Section 12(3). It is a

statutory obligation on these Councils to advice the Government on

all matters concerning the scheme and its implementation in the State

including promotion of widest possible dissemination of information

about the scheme made under this Act, establishment of central

evaluation and monitoring system etc. In other words, this whole

machinery has been set up to ensure smooth and effective

implementation of the provisions of the Act. Besides constituting

these Councils which are expected to function at higher lever, the

Legislature has required constitution of bodies and functionaries at

the grass root level, i.e. District, intermediary and Gram Panchayat

level. In terms of Section 17, the Gram Sabha shall monitor the

execution of the work within the Gram Panchayat and there shall be

regular social audit of all the projects under the scheme. In terms of

Section 19, the State Government is required to make rules and

determine appropriate grievance redressal mechanisms at the Block
10

and the District levels for dealing with any complaint by any person in

respect of implementation of the scheme. Chapter-V requires

establishment of National and State employment Guarantee Funds

and Audit. In other words, these funds are to be created for ensuring

the effective implementation of the schemes. Under Section 20(2),

the Central Government can credit, by way of grants or loans, such

sums of money as the Central Government may consider necessary

to the National Fund which will be utilized in such manner and subject

to conditions, as may be provided by that Government. The intention

of the Legislature is that it wants the provisions of the Act to be

enforced and fix responsibility on the persons causing impediments in

its execution. Those who act contrary to the provisions of the Act are

liable to conviction and fine under Section 25 which may extend to

Rs.1000/-. The Central Government is further empowered to issued

directions under Section 27 of the Act for effective implementation of

the provisions of the Act and has powers to examine any complaint

regarding issue or improper utilization of funds granted under this Act

in respect of any scheme and to take remedial measures and even to

stop release of funds to the scheme in such condition. The

provisions of this Act have been given precedence and shall prevail
11

notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith in any other law for

the time being in force or even in any instrument having effect by

virtue of such law.


The legislative scheme of the Act clearly places the `right to

livelihood' at a higher pedestal than a mere legal right. Conjunct

reading of the afore referred provisions of the Act demonstrates that

the legislature desired to provide minimum one hundred days of

employment to one person in the family to ensure that the members

of the family do not starve and are able to make their ends meet with

reference to the bare minimum requirements for existence. The Act

provides constitution of fora and functionaries right from the higher

levels in the Central and State Governments to the grass-root levels

at Block and Panchayat. The powers of the Central Government are

very wide. They have to ensure that there is proper utilisation of

funds allocated and in the event of any misappropriation or siphoning

of such funds the Central or the State Governments shall not only to

examine such complaints but is commanded by law to stop the

financing to such scheme and take remedial measures immediately.

Where persons are found contravening the law they are required to

be punished in accordance with law. Central and State Governments
12

have been vested with wide powers only with the purpose to ensure

that the schemes under the Act are implemented appropriately,

effectively and the money in the form of allowances reaches the

poorest strata of the society. The ones, irrespective of their stature

in the hierarchy of the Government, who are obstructing the

implementation of the law needs to be dealt with and punished as per

the provisions of the Act.


As already noticed, in the report of the survey conducted by the

petitioner, reference to various States has been made with respect to

malfunctioning and improper implementation of the schemes framed

under the provisions of the Act. Since State of Orissa is accused of

maximum violations and complete non-adherence to the law, for the

present, we are dealing only with the State of Orissa as a defaulting

State while leaving the others. The allegations relate to siphoning of

funds, non-framing of guidelines and improper declaration and

implementation of the schemes in that State. Instead of referring to

the allegations in greater detail it will be appropriate for us to refer to

the relevant portions of `Annexure-A' to the Writ Petition which reads

as under:
13

"You may have heard about the
loopholes and irregularities in implementation
of the National Rural Employment Guarantee
Act (NREGA), the biggest anti-poverty
scheme in the history of India. The State of
Orissa, however, does not have any loopholes
or irregularities in the implementation of this
high-profile rural job scheme. In a random
survey conducted in 100 villages of Orissa's 6
districts, we found only blackholes and serious
irregularities as the only regular thing in all
these villages. Our calculations suggest that
about 75 per cent of the NREGA funds spent
in Orissa have being siphoned and pocketed
by the government officials and this loot has
been very participatory and organized.

This survey was conducted during May-
June 2007 by Delhi-based Centre for
Environment and Food Security (CEFS) to
access and evaluate the performance of
National Rural Employment Guarantee
Scheme (NREGS) in the state of Orissa. The
survey was carried out in 100 villages spread
over six districts of KBK (Kalahandi-Bolangir-
Koraput) region, namely; Bolangir, Nuapada,
Kalahandi, Koraput, Nabarangpur and
Rayagada.

The findings of CEFS survey are
shocking, scandalous and outrageous. The
Rural Employment Gurantee Scheme in
Orissa has been virtually hijacked by officials
responsible for the implementation of this
scheme. Our survey findings have revealed
that there is participatory loot, plunder and
pillage in Orissa's rural job scheme. There is
open loot of taxpayers' money, there is
plunder of poors' right to guaranteed wage
employment for 100 days and there is pillage
14

of every single norm of democratic
governance and administrative accountability.

It is shocking to note that we could not
find a single case where entries in the job
cards are correct and match with the actual
number of workdays physically verified with
the villagers. Out of the 100 sample villages
covered for this survey, 18 villages have not
received any job card, 37 villages have not
received any job under NREGS even after 16
months of launch of the scheme, 11 villages
have received neither job cards nor any job,
Job cards of 23 villages were lying with VLWs
(Village Level Worker) and JEs (Junior
Engineer) for more than 6-8 months against
the will of card holders.

In 25 villages, only half, one third or
partial wage payments were made. In 20
villages, we found scandalous difference in
the number of workdays recorded in the job
cards and the number of actual workdays
given to the workers. There are 3 villages
where no wage payments have been made
even after 4-8 months of the works done. We
found 6 villages in Kashipur block of
Rayagada district where NREGS work was
being done without any job cards being issued
to the villagers.

As per the NREGA implementation
Status Report for the Financial Year 2006-07
(http://nrega.nic.in/state/nregampr.asp), the
total number of job cards issued in Orissa was
2593194. Orissa was able to provide 7.99
crore persondays of employment to 13,94,169
households spread over 19 districts of the
state. In other words, 13,94,169 families have
got an average of 57 days of wage
employment. This includes 3.93 crore
15

persondays of employment provided to
Adivasis (STs) and 1.89 crore persondays of
employment provided to Dalits (SCs). Orissa
also claims that 1,54,118/families in the state
completed 100 days of wage employment
during 2006-07. But, our experience in 100
villages of Orissa suggests that all these
claims are bogus and manufactured only in
official records in order to siphon NREGS
funds.

Our back of the envelope calculations
suggests that less than 2 crore persondays of
employment has been provided on the ground
and more than 6 crore persondays of
employment has been provided only in the
pages of false job cards and fabricated muster
rolls. We could not find a single family in the
100 sample villages who had actually got 100
days of wage employment. We found very
few families who had got 40-60 days of wage
employment. The rest of the families, if at all
they have got any employment, it is mostly
between 5 to 21 days. However, online job
cards of most of these households have false
and fabricated job and wage entries for 108
days, 104 days, 102 days, 100 days, 96 days,
90 days, 84 days, 72 days, 65 days, 60 days,
52 days and so on. This is the way Orissa
Government has "successfully" spent Rs.733/-
crore and provided about 8 crore persondays
of employment.

Our back of the envelope calculations
suggest that out of Rs.733 crore spent in
Orissa during 2006-7, more than 500 crore
has been siphoned and pocketed by the
government officials of executing agencies. In
other words, less than 25 per cent of the
NREGS funds have reached the targeted
16

population and more than 75 per cent have
been eaten up by sarkari babus. There are
thousands of villages in Orissa where more
than 80-90 per cent of NREGS funds have
been misappropriated by the executing
officials.

According to the Government of Orissa,
each of the needy households in 19 districts of
the state was given on an average 57 days of
wage employment under NREGA during
2006-7. Our calculations suggest that only
about 5 days of average employment ahs
been given to the needy families in the 19
districts of Orissa where NREGA was
implemented during 2006-7. How have we
arrived at the figure of 5 days of average
employment? It is very simple."


The State of Orissa has filed two different reply affidavits. First

affidavit was filed on 10th July, 2009 while the second on 29th April,

2010. In these affidavits, the averments made in the said survey

report and the Writ Petition has been denied and it is averred that the

schemes are appropriately being implemented. It is stated that it is

not correct to say that 25% of the person-days have been provided

and 75% of the person-days are only shown in paper is not at all

correct, in view of the involvement of Palli Sabha, Gram Sabha, G.P.,

Block and Zilla Parishad as well as the district administration

including Collectors. Further by creating 799 lakhs of person-days

assets have been created like tanks, roads, plantations, forestry etc.
17

The allegation with regard to partial wage payment, discrepancy in

the number of working days recorded in the job cards vis-`-vis the

number of actual work days provided to the workers and further

averment with respect to Kasipur block, Raygara district regarding

execution of NREGS work without issuing any job-card are stated to

be false. It is, however admitted that for the year 2006-07 a sum of

Rs. 890 crores was allocated and Rs. 733 crores has been utilized. It

is denied that any amount thereof was misappropriated. In the latter

affidavit attempt has been made to show as to how the suggestions

made by the petitioner in their affidavits in relation to social audit,

transparency and grievance redressal and unemployment allowances

are to be dealt with. Regarding issuance of guidelines for proper

implementation of the schemes it was stated that once the

operational guidelines framed by the Central Government are made

mandatory, which are to be implemented by the State Government, it

would tell upon the federal character of the country and the State

Government should have no scope to improve upon the

implementation apparatus by infusing some innovations during

execution.
18

Affidavits have been filed by the Union of India on three

different occasions. Union of India claims to have notified the wage

rate in relation to different States and that rate has now been revised

to Rs. 100/- for the States who have approached the Ministry of Rural

Development for revision of the same. According to Central

Government it has been meeting the cost of implementing the Act

since its enactment. For strengthening the professional support for

transparency and accountability, the limit of administrative expenses

has been enhanced from 4% to 6% in March, 2009. Funds released

to the State Governments approximately constitute about 70% as

wage component and 30% as material component. In the year 2009-

10 Central release accounted for Rs. 33,506 crores out of total

available fund of Rs. 49,529 crores. It is stated that the provisions of

the Act are being implemented. In the latest affidavit it is averred that

amendments have already been made to Schedule I to the Act with

regard to social audit to strengthen transparency and accountability.

Instructions are stated to have been issued to the State Government

for better implementation of the schemes and efforts are also being

made to integrate the Management Information System (MIS) with

the Post Office so that the amounts can be directly credited into the
19

Post Office accounts. In another affidavit reference has been made to

various provisions of the Act and all that is sought to be reflected

therein, is that schemes are operating properly and matters were also

discussed in the meetings of the Chief Secretaries and Cabinet

Secretaries on 12th April 2008. It is interesting to note that in

Annexure R-1 to this affidavit it has been stated that newspaper

reports appearing in the Business Standard featuring allegation made

by the petitioner NGO were obtained and it was noticed that these

were allegations of very serious nature. The matter was taken up

with the Chief Secretary of Government of Orissa to constitute a High

Level Fact Finding Committee. Director General, National Institute of

Rural Development, Hyderabad was to take up evaluation of

implementation performance of the schemes. A preliminary report

was received from the State Government which contemplated further

enquiry at different levels. Some reports were received and the State

Government was requested to support its findings by facts and

figures. The inquiry report of Fact Finding Committee was forwarded

by the State Government on 28th October, 2007 and on 7th December,

2007 the State Government was reminded to indicate issue by issue

investigation done which should reflect the status on each issue
20

specifically. The Fact Finding Team's report received from the field

was submitted to the State Government but was probably incomplete.

This affidavit was filed in July, 2008 but no details have been

furnished as to what transpired during the period 2007-08.


It is clear from the affidavits filed on behalf of the State of

Orissa as well as Union of India that the allegations of the petitioner

are not without any basis. Extent of their correctness may be a

question to be examined separately but the manner in which the

affidavits have been filed on behalf of the concerned State as well as

the Union of India do not, statistically, deny the allegations as no

figures to the contrary have been provided. The inquiry committee

which had been appointed for quite some time has failed to submit

any final report to the competent authority. The interim report which

has been submitted with respect to the `action taken' by the Union of

India is again a matter which has been left to imagination of all

concerned. It is nowhere stated in these affidavits that whether, even

a single officer/official, till today, has been found to be guilty of

contravening the provisions of the Act or causing impediments in

effective implementation of the schemes. This petition itself has been

pending since the year 2007 and the records are available to the
21

respective respondents, still no efforts have been made by the

concerned authorities to place on record any reports to show that the

averments made by the petitioner NGO in the Writ Petition, and

particularly `Annexure-A' to the same, are absolutely incorrect.


To us, from the record available, it appears that all is not well in

the State of Orissa with regard to implementation of the schemes

framed under the provisions of the Act. In the affidavit filed on behalf

of the Union of India as well as the States, the allegations in regard to

irregularities, diversion of funds, improper maintenance of records

and non-implementation of schemes have been vaguely denied

without providing any specific data based explanation in response

thereto. The enquiries which were initiated years back have not

culminated into any final orders or issuance of directions in regard to

proper implementation of the schemes. This clearly shows default on

the part of the Union of India as well as the States in discharging their

statutory obligation of achieving the public purpose that is sought to

be achieved under the provisions of the Act. There seems to be

serious irregularities in the effective implementation of such schemes.

A statutory obligation under the provisions of the Act, i.e. right to

livelihood which has also been declared by the courts as an integral
22

part of Article 21 of the Constitution is being frustrated by the very

functionaries who are responsible for proper and effective

implementation of the Act.


To add to all this, we also need to notice that nobody even

appeared on behalf of State of Orissa, before the Court on 13th

December, 2010, when the case was taken up for hearing. Union of

India claims to be releasing funds to the State of Orissa for

purposeful implementation of the schemes but has miserably failed to

exercise its supervisory and investigative powers including the power

to issue directions under different provisions of the Act. From the

affidavit filed, it is clear that there is no record to substantiate proper

utilization of the released funds and whether or not they have been

distributed as per the schemes or even have been diverted towards

other expenses of the State. It is expected of the Union of India to

create proper check and balances by issuance of directions, framing

of rules and issuing guidelines so that there is no contravention of the

statutory provisions and the laudable legislative purpose is not

defeated by inactions and/or improper actions. Be it the State

Government or the Union of India, accountability, transparency and

effective implementation of the statutory scheme are the established
23

canons which would govern their action. To implement the legislative

intent is the primary duty of all concerned.


In view of the above, we are constrained to observe that the

Union of India as well as the State of Orissa, prima facie, have filed to

effectively and purposefully implement the provisions of the Act. This

has resulted in the deprivation of the entitled class from getting

employment and receiving the allowances due to them in terms of the

statutory guarantees available to them under the Act.


Thus, we are compelled to issue the following directions for

strict compliance by the concerned authorities :


1. The compliance report shall be filed in the form of affidavit

which shall be sworn by the Additional Secretary, in-charge for

compliance of the provisions of the Act in the Ministry of Rural

Development, Government of India, New Delhi and the Chief

Secretary, State of Orissa within three weeks from today.


2. The instances and figures referred to in the survey report

submitted by the petitioner shall be specifically dealt with in that

affidavit.
24

3. The affidavit should be filed positively within the stipulated time

directed in this order and further we call upon both the Union of

India and the State Government to show cause as to why there

should not be a direction to the CBI to investigate this matter in

accordance with law.


We also issue the direction that affidavits to be filed by the

respective authorities shall, inter alia, but specifically answer the

following points :


(a) What is the extent of funds released by the Union of India to the

State of Orissa for implementation of the schemes under the

provisions of the Act for each of the year between 2006 to

2010?


(b) To what extent and for what projects, the released funds have

been utilized? Whether state of Orissa has given to the Central

Government the requisite certificate of utilization?


(c) Findings to be recorded whether any amount earmarked for any

of the schemes under NREGA has been diverted to any other

Head of Account including revenue account by State of Orissa.
25

(d) How many applicants, of how many households, have been

actually employed and have been paid allowances under the

provisions of the Act?


(e) The figures in terms of the above directions shall be provided

for the period from 2006 to 2010.


(f) Whether any social audit of the projects under the Gram Sabha

has been conducted in terms of Section 17(2)? If yes, its

detailed findings for the above mentioned period.


(g) Whether all the authorities/officers/officials, from the higher

levels in the Central Government or State Governments to the

grass-root levels at District, intermediary and Panchayats, to

ensure effective implementation of the schemes under the Act

have been appointed? If no, reasons therefor.


(h) Whether the Union of India or the State Government, in

consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India

or otherwise, have conducted any general audit of accounts of

the schemes at any level in terms of Section 24 of the Act? If

the answer is in the affirmative, then details thereof, particularly,
26

the objections, if any, raised by the Auditors; if the answer is in

the negative, then reasons therefor.


(i) Whether the Central Government has issued any directions

concerning utilization of funds under NREGA while disbursing

the amounts to State of Orissa? Whether these have been

complied with by State of Orissa?


(j) Whether the Central Government has received any complaints

about working of the schemes, utilization of funds, providing of

employment and payment of allowances under the provisions of

the Act? If so, what action has been taken in terms of Section

27(2) of the Act? It should be stated with complete statistics

and data.


(k) Whether the Union of India or the State of Orissa have, till date,

found even a single official/functionary guilty of contravention in

terms of Section 25 of the Act and whether any complaint has

been filed in any Court of competent jurisdiction? If so, the

result thereof.


(l) The contents and the background of the complaints received

and referred in `Annexure-R1' to the affidavit filed by the Union
27

of India should be stated precisely. Why the enquiry reports as

referred to in `Annexure-R1' to the Affidavit of the Union of India

of July 2008, no final reports have been prepared and

submitted before this Court till date. Further, it shall also be

stated as to why the findings of the interim reports referred in

the said affidavit have not been placed before this Court. A

complete summary thereof shall be annexed to the Affidavit.


Stand over for four weeks.



.............................................CJI.
(S.H. Kapadia)



................................................J.
(K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan)



................................................J.
(Swatanter Kumar)
New Delhi;
December 16, 2010

SUPREME COURT ADVOCATE MIDDLE INCOME GROUP LEGAL AID SOCIETY

SUPREME COURT MIDDLE INCOME GROUP LEGAL AID SOCIETY
109, LAWYERS CHAMBERS, POST OFFICE WING,
SUPREME COURT COMPOUND, NEW DELHI-110001.
Registered under Societies Registration Act XII of 1860
(The donation to the Society are exempted under Section 80 G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 )
( Telefax 3388597)

MIDDLE INCOME GROUP SCHEME


1. This scheme is intended to provide legal services to the middle income citizen i.e. citizen whose gross maximum income per month does not exceed Rs.20,000/- or Rs.2,40,000/- per annum and in appropriate case even allow applicant having income upto Rs.25,000/- per month or Rs.3,00,000/- per annum.

DEFINITION.

( a ) The Scheme is known as "SUPREME COURT MIDDLE INCOME GROUP LEGAL AID SCHEME". The scheme is self supporting and the initial capital of the Scheme shall be contributed by the first Executive Committee.

SCHEDULE

The schedule of fee and expenses as appended to the Scheme shall be in force and is liable to be amended by the Society from time to time.

THE OFFICE BEARERS OF THE SCHEME - The Members of the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee shall be Ex-officio Members of the Scheme. The Secretary and the Treasurer for the Scheme shall be nominated by the Executive Committee of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. The Executive Committee shall have the power to coopt / appoint other members on the Committee or Staff to carry out the aims and objective of the Scheme.

The office bearers of the Scheme shall meet at least once in two months or earlier if so deemed / expedient and necessary.

GOVERNING BODY : The names, occupation and designation of the members of the Governing Body to whom the management of the Society is entrusted as required under Section 2 of the Societies Registration Act, 1860, as applicable to the National Capital Territory of Delhi are as follows :-

1. Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.G. Balakrishnan ... Patron-in-Chief
Chief Justice of India

2. Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia... Patron
Judge, Supreme Court of India.

3. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.V.Raveendran ... President
Judge, Supreme Court of India.

4. Shri Goolam E. Vahanvati...Ex-officio Vice-President
Attorney General for India

5. Mr. Ranjit Kumar .... Honorary Secretary
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of india

6. Mr. P.H. Parekh ... Honorary Treasurer
Sr. Advocate, Supreme Court of India

7. Mr. Raju Ramachandran ... Member
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of India

8. Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad ... Member
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of India

9.. Mr. L. Nageswara Rao ....Member
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of India

10. Mr. Paramjit Singh Patwalia .... Member
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of India

11. Ms. Indu Malhotra ....Member
Sr. Advocate,
Supreme Court of India.

12. Ms. Indira Sawhney ....Member
Advocate,
Supreme Court of India.

13. Ms. Binu Tamta ....Member
Advocate,
Supreme Court of India.

2. The Scheme will be applicable for case intended to be filed in Supreme Court.

3. The Scheme will not be applicable to cases mentioned below, falling under the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

(a) Reference under Section 130A of the Custom Act, 1962,
(b) Reference under Section 35 H of the Central and Excise and Salt Act, 1944.
(c) Reference under Section 82C of the Gold ( Control) Act, 1968
(d) Reference under Section 7(2) of the M.R.T.P. Act, 1969.
(e) Reference under Section 25 J of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
(f) Reference under Art. 317(1) of the Constitution.
(g) Election under Part III of the President and Vice-President Act, 1952.
(h) Election of Member of Parliament and Members of State Legislature under the Election Law.
(i) Appeal under Section 55 of the M.R.T.P. Act, 1969.
(j) Appeal under Clause (b) of Section 130 E of the Customs Act, 1962.
(k) Appeal under Section 35 L of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944.
(i) Review matters.

3A. When litigant can approach the MIG Society.
The litigant can approch the MIG Society in two situations viz. To file or defend a case in the Supreme Court, this would include :-

- Appeal / Special Leave Petitions, Civil or Criminal, against an order of the High Court.
- Writ Petition / Habeas Corpus.
- Petition for transferring a case, civil or criminal, pending in one State to another State within India.
- Legal advice regarding proposed legal proceedings in Supreme Court


4. The rates of fee payable to an Advocate or to a Senior Advocate ( if engaged at the request of the litigant ) will be such as indicated in the Schedule appended to this Scheme as applicable from time to time.

5. There will be a panel of Advocates including Advocate-on-Record under the Scheme. While drawing up the panel care be taken to include one Advocate, but not exceeding two, knowing Regional Language in the territory of India in which the work is conducted in the Court below.

The panel Advocates shall given an undertaking in writing that they will abide by the terms and conditions of the Scheme upon assignment of a case under the Scheme.

6. Every person who desires to avail of the services of an Advocate empanelled under the Scheme will have to approach the Secretary of the Scheme by filing an application in the prescribed form annexed hereto along with the relevant documents.

7. As soon as the papers are received they would be assigned to the Advocate-on-Record of the choice indicated by an applicant upon his request under the scheme. In case the learned Advocate after perusing them opines that this is not a fit case for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court, in that view of the matter the applicant will not be entitled to be benefit of the Scheme. Upon such as endorsement being made either upon the case papers or in any accompanying letter, the Supreme Court Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society shall return the papers forthwith to the applicant and deduct a sum of Rs.500/- only towards service charges. The balance amount of service charges and the amounts which may have been deposited by the applicant with the Committee towards appropriation as fee and all expenses in the conduct of the case will be refunded. If the learned Advocate-on-Record after examining the matter is satisfied that it is a fit case to be proceeded with, then the Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society will proceed to take the view that an applicant is entitled to legal aid. The view expressed by the Learned Advocate-on-Record will be final in so far as the eligibility of the applicant for obtaining the benefit of the Scheme is concerned.

8. The applicant may indicate any 3 names both in relation to the Advocate-on-Record or the arguing Counsel or the Senior Counsel as the case may be in the order of preference from out of the panel maintained by Society. The Society would attempt to honour the choice indicated. However, the final right to assign the papers of the applicant under the Scheme to any Advocate-on-Record or the arguing Counsel or Senior Counsel will remain with the Supreme Court Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society.

9. Any intending litigant desirous of availing the benefit of the Scheme shall have to fill up the form prescribed and accept all the terms and conditions contained therein. The proforma shall also contain a schedule of fee and expenses as application from time to time. A sum of Rs.500/- shall be payable to the Supreme Court Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society (SCMIGLAS) as service charges. The schedule shall indicate the fee payable for various items of work and shall also indicate the Court fees and the approximate expenses for preparation of the Court record. The applicant shall have to deposit the fee indicated by the Secretary, which will be in accordance with the schedule attached to the Scheme. It is the Secretary, who will register the case under the MIG Legal Aid Scheme and proceed to forward the papers to the Advocate-on-Record/Arguing Counsel/Senior Counsel on the panel for opinion.

In relation to the approximate expenses for preparation of the Court record, the Secretary will upon a perusal of the papers determine as to what would be the approximate amount necessary for the purpose of such preparation of the Court record, and in accordance with the schedule indicate the same to the applicant. If, however, for any reason, the amount which is due to the learned Advocate-on-Record under the scheme exceeds the amount indicated by the Secretary then the applicant will be duty bound to make good the difference upon the Secretary certifying it to be so under the Scheme.

10. That the Executive Committee of the Scheme will open a S.B. Account with the UCO Bank, Supreme Court Compound in the name of "Supreme Court Middle Income Group Legal Aid Society". The account will be operated by any three members of the Executive Committee authorised by the Committee and the signature of any two members shall be sufficient to operate the account.

11. All sums received under the scheme including grants in aid will be accounted for by a person to be nominated in that behalf and duty audited.

12. The amount so received under the Scheme will be used to defray all the expenses including the salaries and all expenses duly approved by the Executive Committee.

13. A Contingent Fund of the Scheme will be created to meet the miscellaneous expenditure in connection with the case under the Scheme by requiring the applicant under the Scheme to deposit upto the stage of admission, a sum of Rs.500/- in addition to the charges required to be deposited with the Society, out of this contingent fund, the fee of the auditor for auditing the account, printing of forms of application, vakalatnama, affidavit of facts, binding of registers for maintaining account etc., shall be made. Thus at the time of handling over the case papers, the applicant will have to make payment of the estimated fee, expenses that are indicated by the Secretary as well as a sum of Rs.500/-.

14. The amount indicated by the Secretary on the basis of the estimate details shall be deposited by the applicant in cash or by way of a Bank Draft. In the event of the learned Advocate taking the view that the case is not fit one for an appeal to the Supreme Court, then the entire amount after deduction Rs.500/- towards minimum service charges of the Committee shall be refunded to the applicant by way of cheque.

15. The initial expenses for printing of forms and other office expenses would be borne by initial corpus of the Scheme.

16. The pattern of payment of fee to the Advocates under the Scheme will be same as per the schedule as applicable from time to time.

16A. What documents are required from the litigants in approaching the Supreme Court.
The applicants are required to submit the applications forms to the MIG Society alongwith full documentations. For instance, if he / she seeks to file an appeal against the order of the High Court, he/ she is required to submit a certified copy of the order of the High Court, Petition copy filed by him/her in the High Court, copies of the Lower
Court judgements/order and other relevant documents. If these are in a language other than English, please try and send translated copies.

17. On the assigning of a case to an Advocate under the Scheme the intending litigant will be directed to deposit with the Society the fee and expenses as per schedule as assessed by the Secretary. The payment to the Advocate or the service charges payable to the Scheme as stated in the schedule shall be in cash or bank draft.

The Advocate-on-Record shall submit his bill on the basis of the amounts prescribed in the schedule with regard to printing ,Court fee and his appearance fee alongwith a copy of the filing memo in token of a proof of filing the Petition / Appeal for which the claim is made. The Advocate will inform the Society about the admission of any matter so that the client can be requested to pay the fee for processing the Appeal, without which information it will not be possible for the Committee to recover the amount from the client and pay to the Advocate on hearing of the case. The fee to the Advocate in regular matter shall be made on receipt of a bill from the Advocate at the time of the conclusion of the final hearing of the matter.

18. Once the case is assigned to an Advocate it is the responsibility of the Advocate to deal with the matter as he/she deems fit in the interest of the client and the Advocate is required to communicate directly with the litigant and the Society will not monitor assignment and final disposal of the matter. However, the Society will intercede upon the receipt of a complaint in writing.

19. After a complaint is received by the Society from the litigant and/ or the concerned Advocate against the litigant / Advocate then the Committee after enquiry may take such action as is deemed fit and necessary.

20. If the Advocate who is appointed under the Scheme is found negligent in the conduct of the case entrusted to him, then he will be required to return the brief together with the fee which may have been received by him from the applicant under the Scheme.

Further, the Society would not be responsible for the negligent conduct of the case but the entire responsibility will that be of the Advocate vis-a-vis the client. The name of the Advocate would however, be struck off from the panel prepared under the Scheme.


SCHEDULE OF FEE FOR ADVOCATE ON RECORD /ADVOCATES.

(A) APPEARING ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER.

1.Fee for drafting SLP / Writ Petition / Transfer Petition including
list of dates and miscellaneous application such as stay exemption,
bail, condonation of delay including conferences with the client
upto the admission hearing of the matter ( before notice stage ) FEE Rs.2200/-


2. Fee for drafting rejoinder affidavit, and / or contesting matter
after notice is issued by the Court and till the disposal of the
matter at the notice stage including acting work and adjournment
( excluding final disposal at notice stage ) FEE Rs.1100/-
3.Fee for hearing of the matter at final disposal stage inclusive Rs.1650/- per day upto a maximum of . Rs.3300/-

of adjournment, if any, and / or at appeal stage.

( B ) APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS

1. Fee for drafting counter affidavit / statement of objection
and all other necessary applications including application for
vacating stay and appearance inclusive of all conferences,
upto admission stage excluding final disposal at notice stage. FEE Rs.2200/-.

2. Fee for hearing of matter at final disposal stage including Rs.1650/-PER DAY
adjournment, if any, and / or at appeal stage. UPTO A MAXIMUM
OF Rs.3300/-

( C ) FEE FOR SENIOR ADVOCATES.

1. Fee for settlement of SLP / Writ Petition / Transfer petition/ Rs.1000/-
Counter affidavit / Rejoinder Affidavit / Statement of
objection including conference etc.

2. Fee for appearance at the admission stage / after notice
- Rs.1650/- per appearance upto a maximum of Rs.3300/-.

3. Fee for appearance at final disposal / appeal stage - Rs.2500/- per appearance upto a maximum of Rs.5000/-

SCHEDULE OF RATES FOR OUT OF POCKET EXPENSES

1. Computer Typing Rs.10.00 per page
2. Photostat charges for each extra copy Rs. 0.50 per page
3. Steno charges Rs. 8.00 per page
4. Paper Book Binding Rs. 5.00 each

Advocate Supreme Court of India- Legal Aid Services Group

SUPREME COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE

NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBERS OF THE ADVOCATES-ON-RECORD ON THE COMMON PANEL OF SUPREME COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTEE AND THE REGISTRY W.E.F. 01.01.2008


1. Ms. Urmila Sirur Advocate 133, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph: 23381451 ( O ) 9810055994 ( Mob )

2. Mr. Gautama Goswami Advocate B – 154, MIG Flat, Rajouri Garden. NEW DELHI –27 Ph : 25971558

3. Mr. Jagmohan Khanna, Advocate, 67 Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India NEW DELHI – 110 001. Tel. No. 23384025

4. Mr. Uma Datta Advocate, 131, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph : 23381586, 23389288 ( O )

5. Mr. Badridas Sharma, Advocate, 111, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph : 23782836 ( O ) 25556250 ( R ) 9313326749 ( Mob ).

6. Mr. S.C. Patel, Advocate, 126, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph :23384007 ( O ) 22722785 ( R )

7. Mr. M. Qamaruddin Advocate, 120, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph. 23389465 ( O ) 22755833 ( R )

8. Ms. Laxmi Arvind, Advocate 86 Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India NEW DELHI – 110 001. Tel. No. 23387292

9 Mr. Ramesh C. Kohli, Advocate 69 Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of Inia, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Tel. No. 23386286, 26512282

10. Mr. Shakeel Ahmed Advocate 3, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, Ph : 23385122 ( O ) Mob. 9212762540, 9350547131.

11 Dr. Meera Agarwal, Advocate, 3, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.22753774 & 22759901(R)\23388262 (O)

12 Mr. Ramesh Chandra Mishra, Advocate 3, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.22753774 & 22759901 (R) 23388262 (O)

13 Mr. Vijay Panjwani, Advocate 339, Lawyers Chamber, High Court, NEW DELHI – 110 003. Ph. 23389635, Mob.9818475018

14. Mrs. M. Qamaruddin, Advocate, 120, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, Ph : 23389465 ( O ) 22755833 ( R )

15. Mr. H.M. Singh Advocate, 338, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, Ph : 23070019( O ) 9810285363 ( Mob )

16. Mr. Surya Kant 422-A, Lawyers' Chambers, Bhagwan Das Road, Supreme Court, New Delhi-110 001 Tel.No.23382186

17 Mr. Brij Bhushan, Advocate 139, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.23070073

18. Mr. T.N. Singh, Advocate, 81, Lawyers Chambers Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Phone No. 23387353 ( O ) 29223933 ( R ) 9818340391 ( Mob )

19. Ms. Naresh Bakshi Advocate 120, New Lawyers Chamber, M.C. Seetalvad Wing, Supreme Court, New Delhi Tel. Nos. 9811641789, 23070417, 23070607

20. Mr. C.N. Sreekumar, Advocate, 432, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi Phone : 23383511 ( O ) 9312282480 ( Mob )

21. Ms. C.K. Sucharita, Advocate 214, New Lawyers Chambers, C.K. Daphtary Block, Supreme Court, Tilak Lane, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph23383607 (O), 22722291, 22733997 (R), 9810469738(Cell)

22. Mr. D. N. Goburdhun, Advocate 30, Lawyers chambers, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.23384494.

23. Ms. Mridula Ray Bhardwaj Advocate, Supreme Court of India, 130, New Lawyers Chambers, M.C. Shetalward Block, New Delhi Ph 23386730 ( O ) 9312243081 ( Mob )

24. Mr. Subhash Sharma, Advocate Chamber No.326, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.23070088, Mob.9818867273

25. Mr. Satya Pal Pasi, Advocate 312, M.C. Setalwad Chambers Bhagwan Dass Road, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.23070312, 25991415, 9811832575 (M)

26. Ms. Manjeet Chawla, Advocate B-45 Cannaught Place, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23321017, 9811070099 (M)

27. Mr. Manoj Prasad, Advocate 135, New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110001 Ph.23070646

28. Mr. Sudhir Kulshreshtha, Advocate, Ch. No. 433, M.C. Setalvad Block, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23383957/23386438

29. Mr. Ashok Kumar Sharma, Advocate 111, Lawyer Chamber, C.K. Daftary Block, Tilak Lane NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23073366, 9810327521

30. Mr. J.S. Manhas, Advocate, 129, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.. 23070862, 9811088934

31. Mr. Sanjeev Anand Advocate Y-10 & Y-11, 2nd Floor, Green Park (Main) NEW DELHI-110 016. Ph.46021862 (O) , 46021863(Fax), 41759115 (R), 9810059623 (M)

32. Mr. Pramanand Gaur, Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Chamber No. 221, C.K. Daphtary Block, New Delhi 9312242835 ( M )

33. Mr. Krishna Pal Singh Advocate Supreme Court of India, Chamber No. 115, C.K. Daphtary Block, New Delhi. Ph : 23073070 ( O ) 9213950080 ( Mob )

34 Mr. Sandeep Narain, Advocate, 305, New Lawyers Chambers C.K. Daphtary Block, Tilak Lane, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23381801

35. Mr. A.D.N. Rao, Advocate, 116, Lawyers Chambers R.K. Jain Block, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Ph : 23381057 ( O ) 9810153907 ( Mob )

36. Mr. Irshad Ahmad Advocate, 308, C.K. Daphtary Block, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. Ph : 22236256 ( R ) 9868169586 ( Mob )

37. Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Advocate, 10, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Buildings NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23383603 (O), 26515934(R), 9811463937(M)

38. Mr. O.P. Gaggar Advocate, S-1, Akarshan Bhawan, 23, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi –110002 Ph : 23281674 ( R ) 9810185751 ( Mob )

39. Ms. B. Sunita Rao, Advocate 201, C.K. Dafthary Chambers, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 23384216, 9811151499 (M)

40. Ms. Sunita Sharma, Advocate, H. No. P-11 Baird Place, Delhi Cantt. DELHI. Ph.9811777465, 25682815.

41. Ms. Abha R. Sharma, Advocate, 101, New Lawyers Chamber, C.K. Daftary Block, New Delhi-1 Tel.No. 23388358 ( O ) 22742288 ( R ) 9811033282 ( Mob )

42. Mr. Shiv Kumar Suri, Advocate Flat No. 202, Arunachal Building, 19 Barakhamba Road, Cannaught Place, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.41571111, 9810370732

43. Ms. Purnima Bhat Kak, Advocate, 48, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph : 23389629 ( O ) 9811158342, 9212578342 ( Mob )

44. Ms. Rachna Joshi Issar, Advocate 315, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, C.K. Daphtary Block, Tilak Lane, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.9810127323

45. Mr. Jitendra Mohan Sharma Advocate, 320, Lawyers Chamber, C.K. Daphtry Block New Delhi. Tel.No.9810125684, 23386175

46. Mr. Balraj Dewan, Advocate, Chamber No.108, C.K. Daphtary, Lawyers Block, Tilak Lane, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23856791, 9810354558(M),

47. Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Advocate G 35, Saket, NEW DELHI-110017. Ph. 26867053, 26856907, 98111-13449 (M)

48. Ms. Minakshi Vij, Advocate No. 17, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 9811132037, 951292266903, 23382271

49. Mr. E.C. Vidyasagar Advocate, Supreme Court of India, G-11, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi-14 Tel. No. 9810064644

50. Ms. N. Annapoorani, Advocate 113, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 23387056, 9810363045 (M)

51. Ms. Revathy Raghavan Advocate, 104, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, New Delhi Tel. Nos.9311103099, 9350209015, 22755141 (R)

52. Mr. Krishnanand Pandey Advocate, 322, Lawyers Chamber, M.C. Setalwad Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi Phone : 9810138294 ( Mob ) 95120 –2776230 ( Res.)

53. Mr. C.S. Ashri, Advocate Ch. No. 89, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.(R) 27866608, (O) 23389736, (M) 9818186026

54. Mr. Ranbir Yadav, Advocate 33, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.26135488, 23389926, 9810727271 (M)

55. Mr. B.S. Banthia, Advocate, Supreme Court of India 501, Nirmal Tower, 26, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi –110 001 Ph : 23313599, 23325602 ( O )

56. Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhatti, Advocate 18, Todar Mal, Road, Bengali Market, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23711238, 41525860, 9811168948 (M), 9350887879

57. Mr. Vidya Dhar Gaur, Advocate, 67, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.9910359593(M), 23384025

58. Mr. Subhro Sanyal Advocate, Supreme Court of India, Flat No.41, Tower-I, Supreme Enclave. Mayur Vihar-I, New Delhi-91 Phone :.32440002 ( R ) 9871314996 ( Mob )

59. Mr. K.V. Vijayakumar Advocate, 24, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, New Delhi Ph : 23386651 ( O ) 9810660358 ( Mob. )

60. Mr. B.K. Satija, Advocate, 88, Lawyers Chambers Supreme Court, New Delhi. Ph : 233885700 ( O ) 9810347884 ( Mob. )

61. Mr. Bimal Roy Jad, Advocate 134, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.23073133, 9810132086(M)

62. Mr. Ajay K. Agrawal Advocate, Supreme Court of India, M-15, Lajpat Nagar-III, New Delhi Tel.No.9811021565 ( Mob )

63. Ms. Anjani Aiyagari Advocate, Supreme Court of India, C-II/63, Motibagh-I, New Delhi Tel. No.26889829, 24105615 ( Res ) 9811133627 ( Mob.)

64. Mr. R.S. Jena, Advocate Supreme Court Bar No. I, Tilak Marg, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph.9811575947, 951202691698

65. Ms. Nanita Sharma, Advocate 83, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 65395695,26277132 (R), 23381100 (O), 9313346888 (M)

66. Mrs. S. Usha Reddy, Advocate, Supreme Court of India, 176, Supreme Enclave, Mayur Vihar –1, Delhi Ph : 22758018 ( Res. ) 9810141663 ( Mob. )

67. Mr. Rohit Minocha, Advocate 572, Patiala House Courts NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 23384635, 9810034724

68. Ms. D.V. Padma Priya, Advocate Flat No. 1014, Apnavilla Apartments, Plot No. 23, Sector-10, Dwarka, NEW DELHI-110075. Ph.25072504, 9911294103

69. Ms. Asha Gopalan Nair, Advocate, 57, Lawyers Chambers Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Phone : 9810348991 ( Mob. )

70. Mr. Anil Shrivastav, Advocate, S C Bar , Library No. 2, Supreme Court of India NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph (R) 0120-2320598/3250594, (M) 9810291281

71. Mr. Rajiv Mehta, Advocate, Library No. 2, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph. 9810086843 (M), 26692896, 23384150

72. Ms. V. Mohana, Advocate, E-14, Dronacharya Apartments, Mayur Vihar-I Extn. DELHI-110 091. Ph.22710884,9868110575 M)

73. Mr. Varinder Kumar Sharma, Advocate, L-7A, South Ext. Part-2, NEW DELHI. Ph.9810101807, 26266716, 26266717

74. Ms. Shipra Ghose, Advocate, S-561, Flat No. 3, Greater Kailash Part-II, NEW DELHI-110 048. Ph.29217437, 9810371533

75. Ms. Sudha Gupta, Advocate, 127, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.23385703, 26911804, 9868579677 (M)

76. Ms. Kamakshi S. Mehlwal, Advocate, Kim & Co. 1-Link Road, Jangpura Extension, DELHI-110 014. Ph.9810038724, 24321232, 24321233

77. Mr. R. Nedumaran Advocate 27, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Tel.No., 23381663 ( O ) 22712031 ( R ) 9810990137 ( Mob.)

78. Mr. Javed Mahmud Rao, Advocate 84, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.23389249 (O), (M) 9810261084

79. Mr. Ajit Kumar Pande, Advocate E/232, Greater Kailash-Two (2), NEW DELHI-110 048. Ph.29210778, 9811032946

80. Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Advocate, H-127, Shivaji Park, Punjabi Bagh, NEW DELHI-110 026. Ph.9810048686 (M), 46032240, 42466075.

81. Mr. Rana Ranjit Singh, Advocate K-31/19, Model Town-III, DELHI. Ph.27219981, 9810162881

82. Mrs. Santosh Singh, Advocate, 269, Hauz Khas (SFS), Aurobindo Marg, NEW DELHI-110 016. Ph.26511272, 9810881667

83 Mr. Shankar Divate, Advocate, 218, New Chambers, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Mob.9312225751, 951202691591.

84. Mr. V. Ramasubramanian, Advocate, 212, New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi Ph : 23385809 ( O ) 26526128 ( R ) 9868028287 ( Mob )

85. Mr. Gopal Prasad, Advocate, 62, Pocket-D, Mayur Vihar, Phase-II, DELHI – 110 091 Ph.9810009087 (M), 22777417

86. Mr. Himanshu Munshi, Advocate, Supreme Court Bar Library No. 2, NEW DELHI-110001. Ph. 9212123452, 9811033841, 0120-3239803

87. Ms. Promila, Advocate, 97, Lawyers Chambers Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph : 22755015 ( O ) 22714121 ( R ) 9810469728 ( Mob. )

88. Mr. Shekhar Prit Jha, Advocate, Library No. II S.C.B.A. NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.9811009625, 29941542, 29942448

89. Ms. Aparna Bhat, Advocate, B III, Ist Floor, Lajpat Nagar-I, NEW DELHI. Ph.29811811

90. Mr. Naresh Kumar, Advocate, 301, C.K. Daphtary, New Lawyers Chamber, Block-II, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.9810419298(M), 65736668 (R)

91. Mr. Chanchal Kumar Ganguli, Advocate, 10, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.(O) 23381559, (M) 9811192770

92. Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri Advocate, 120-D, Pkt.4, Mayur Vihar-I, Delhi-110 091 Tel.Nos.9810097076, 22790063, 22793529.

93. Mr. Jatin Zaveri, Advocate, 137, Lawyers Chambers, M.C. Setalwad Chambers, Supreme Court New Delhi Ph :32550089 ( O ) 9310156642 ( Mob. )

94. Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Advocate B-9, Sagar Apartments 6, Tilak Marg, NEW DELHI -1 Ph.9868800229, 9313776542

95. Dr. (Ms.) Vipin Gupta, Advocate, 218, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.9891495284, 22454751 (R)

96. Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate, 211, IInd Floor, M.C. Setalwood Lawyers Chamber Building, Bhagwan Das Road, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.23070012 (C), 22755012 / 22754255 (R)

97. Mr. R.V. Kameshwaran, Advocate, C –146, IInd Floor, Kerala Furniture House, Kotla Market Road, Mayur Vihar Phase –I, Delhi Tel : 22759147 ( R ) 9810052313 ( Mob. )

98. Mr. V.K. Sidharthan, Advocate 128, New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.9313885620/25087521/23386990

99. Ms. Rakhi Ray, Advocate, Ch.No.133, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi Tel. No.9868123374 ( Mob.) 23384107 ( O )

100. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, Advocate, 16, New Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph.98116520827 (M), 24319948 (R)

101. Mr. Ramesh Chandra Pandey Advocate, Supreme Court Bar Library – II, Supreme Court of India, Ph : 22722559 ( R ) 9210005277 ( Mob. )

102. Mr. S. Ravi Shankar, Advocate 179, South Avenue, NEW DELHI-110 011. Ph.23010670, 9810213164

103. Dr. V.P. Appan, Advocate, 47, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph:26263085 (R), Mob.9911125599.

104. Mr. K. Rajeev Advocate, 107, Lawyers Chamber (Old Block) Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Tel.No.9891124411, 22791467

105. Mr. V. Sivasubramanian, Advocate, 94, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23388060, 9818060744.

106. Mr. K. Priyadarshi, Advocate, R/o. A-307, Ashiana The Heritage, Plot No. 14, Vaishali, Ghaziabad-201012, Near Anand Vihar, I.S.B.T. DELHI. Ph®: 95120-2779470, Mob: 9810217407.

107. Dr. Sushil Balwada, Advocate, 430, New Lawyers Chamber, M.C. Shetward Block, Bhagwan Das Roa, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph:(O) 23070430, ® 95124-2384797. Mob: 9810303906.

108. Mr. Ravi Prakash Mehrotra, Advocate, 100, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph.23385150/26242900

109. Ms. Nidhi, Advocate, R/o. H-73, First Floor, Lajpat Nagar Part-I, NEW DELHI. Mob:- 9810987418, 9868988092.

110. Mr. Ansar Ahmed Choudhary, Advocate, B-9, Sagar Apartments, 6-Tilak Marg, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph®: 23382962, Mob: 9868157353.

111. Mr. T. Mahipal, Advocate, 138, New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph: 23070011, Mob: 9810005376.

112. Mr. Kuldip Singh, Advocate, 312, New Lawyers Chamber, M.C. Shetward Block, Bhagwan Das Road, NEW DELHI-110 001. Ph: 23070312, Mob: 9312507887.

113. Mr. Praneet Ranjan, Advocate, R/o. C2/2069, Vasant Kunj, NEW DELHI – 110 070. Ph: 26132026, Mob: 9818754664.

114. Mr. Shashi Bhushan, Advocate, 305,New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India. NEW DELHI-110 001. Mob: 9868206641.

115. Mr. Siddhartha Chowdhury Advocate, 70, Lawyers' Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi Tel.No.9818336729 ( Mob. )

116. Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate, 131, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23381586.

117. Ms. Sushmita Lal, Advocate, 55, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court Compound, New Delhi. Ph : 23782113 ( O ) 9899531380 ( Mob )

118 Mr. B. Sridhar, Advocate, 42, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23381009, 23386871, Mob: 9811701874.

119. Mr. Vishnu Sharma Advocate D –402, IInd Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi 110024 Ph : 24616402 ( O ) 25094699 ( R ) 9811111454 ( Mob. )

120. Mr. Aribam Guneshwar Sharma, Advocate, 119, New Lawyers Chambers, Daphtry Block, Tilak Lane, New Delhi. Ph : 9810089840, 9911262923.

121. Ms. Shalu Sharma, Advocate, R/o. C-15, GF-3, Jaipurya Building, Sector-14, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad-201010, UTTAR PRADESH. Mob: 9310281816, 9810281816.

122. Mr. Ajay Kumar Talesara, Advocate, R/o. AC4, 78B, Shalimar Bagh, DELHI – 110 088. Ph®: 27485073, Mob: 9818377516.

123. Ms. Anu Gupta, Advocate, R/o. T.P. 81, Maurya Enclave, Pitampura, DELHI – 110 088. Ph: (R&O) 27327588, Mob: 9871474051.

124. Mr. Ambar Qamaruddin, Advocate, 120, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.:23389465 (O), 22755833, 22759032 (R), 9810066903.

125 Ms. Rutwik Panda, Advocate, 5, Lawyers Chamber (Old), Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Mob:- 9871502727

126 Mr. Rajesh Singh, Advocate, R/o. New C-42, Lane No. 6, West Vinod Nagar, DELHI – 110 092. Ph.: 64167363, 9899139634

127. Mr. Praveen Chaturvedi, Advocate, R/o. A-64, Swaran Jayanti Rail Nagar, Sector-50, Noida. UTTAR PRADESH. Mob: 9811377100, 9811977100, 911204322211..

128. Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Advocate, R/o. 233, Supreme Enclave, Mayur Vihar, Phase-I, DELHI. Ph.: 22795450, 22754025, Mob: 9811284039.

129. Mr. Sunil Kumar Verma Advocate, 50, Old Lawyer's Chamber, Supreme Court, Compound, New Delhi .No.9811384198 ( Mob)

130. Mr. Anish Kumar Gupta, Advocate, Supreme Court Bar Library No. –1, NEW DELHI. Mob:- 09811480821

131. Ms. T. Anamika Advocate, 108, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court Compound, Tel.No.9312245549 ( Mob) 23381761 ( O )

132. Mr. S. Mahendran, Advocate, New Lawyers Chamber No. 21, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.:- 23782838, Mob:- 9871136190

133. Mr. Praveen Agrawal, Advocate, R/o. A-28-S, Delhi Police Apartment, Mayur Vihar-I, DELHI – 110 091. Mob: 9811702850.

134. Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, Advocate, D-7, Manas Apartments, Mayur Vihar Phase –1( Ext.) Delhi Ph : 22744025 ( O ) 9810078350 ( M )

135. Mr. Jitendra Kumar, Advocate, B-7, Ashadeep, 9, Hailey Road, New Delhi –110001 Ph : 23318396, 23318401 ( O ) 9811215039 ( Mob. )

136. Ms. Shilpa Singh Advocate. A-188, II Floor, Defence Colony, New Delhi-24 Tel.No.9811222430 ( Mob), 24331435 ( R )

137. Mr. Prakash Kumar Singh Advocate Chamber No. 112 Seetalwad Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court, Bhagwan Das Marg, Tel. Nos. 22155289 ( R ) 23383987 ( O )

138. Mr. Sunil Dutta Mishra Advocate, 112, M.C. Setalvad Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi Tel.No. 9810648244 ( Mob. )

139. Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocate, R/o. 6, Babar Lane (1st Floor), Bengali Market, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23324521, 23739530, Mob: 9810763003.

140. Mr. S. Balaji Advocate, 24, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi-110 001 Tel Nos.9868120258 ( Mob. ) 23386651 ( O )

141. Mr. P. Vinay Kumar, 63, Lawyers Chamber (Old), Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23388659, 23230708, Mob: 9810455047.

142. Mr. Pahlad Singh Sharma, Advocate, 320,New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph: 23386175, Mob: 9871562025.

143. Ms. K.V. Bharti Upadhyaya, Advocate, 416,New Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Mob: 9313265165, 23070099.

144. Mrs. A. Sumathi, Advocate, R/o. C-51, Jungpura-B, NEW DELHI – 110 014. Ph: 24372370, Mob: 9810912370.

145. Mr. Rishi Malhotra Advocate, 131, Old Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court, New Delhi Tel. Nos.9810110060 ( Mob.), 23389999 (O), 25263368(R)

146. Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Advocate, R/o. 153, Masjid Lane, Jungpura, Bhogal, NEW DELHI – 110 014. Ph: 24372734, Mob: 9871110636.

147. Mr. Daya Krishan Sharma, Advocate, R/o. C-14, (G.F.), South Extn.- Part-II, NEW DELHI – 110 049. Ph: (O) 26267224-25, Mob: 9810167224.

148. Ms. E.R. Sumathy, Advocate, 113, Lawyers Chambers, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi –110001 Ph : 9999009216 ( Mob. ), 25919715.

149. Mr. Aftab Ali Khan Advocate Bar Association Library No.2, Supreme Court, New Delhi Tel.No. 9811375917 ( Mob. )

150. Mr. C.G. Sivakumaran, Advocate, Chamber No. 31, Lawyers Chambers ( Old ) Supreme Court Compound, Ph : 9910371736 ( Mob. )

151. Mr. Parmanand Pandey, Advocate, A4/199, Basant Lane, NEW DELHI – 110 055, Ph.: 27557154, 23348871, Mob: 9868553507.

152. Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Advocate, R/o. 18, Todermal Road, Bengali Market, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Phone: 23711238, Mob: 9350852003.

153. Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate, R/o. F-121, Front Side, Second Floor, C/o. Mr. D.L. Ahuja, Lajpat Nagar-I, NEW DELHI – 110 024. Mob: 9811333948, 9871693947.

154. Mr. Rajeev Kumar Bansal, Advocate, R/o.(1):- B-202, Ramprastha, Ghaziabad, UTTAR PRADESH. (2): 462, Lawyer’s Chamber, Delhi High Court, NEW DELHI Ph: 95120-2614076, 3019262, Mob:- 9818164042.

155. Mr. Nirmal Chopra, Advocate, 116, Old Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Ph.:(O) 23381057, ®22513161, Mob: 9868177227.

156. Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Advocate, R/o. B-111, First Floor, Lajpat Nagar-I, NEW DELHI – 110 024. Ph.: 29811811, Mob: 9811851800.

157. Mr. Devashish Bharuka Advocate, 69, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court, New Delhi Tel.No.9810517287 ( Mob), 22757763

158 Mr. Milind Kumar, Advocate, 29, Lawyers Chamber, Supreme Court of India, NEW DELHI – 110 001. Mob: 9868161390.

159. Mr. Vipin Kumar Jai Advocate, 437, Lawyers Chambers, Patiala House, New Delhi-110 001 Tel. Nos. 9873715747, 9811057423.

160. Mr. A.Venayagam Balan Advocate, B-196A, New Ashok Nagar, Delhi-76 Tel.No.9873874363 ( Mob.)
161. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, C-8/299, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi-110053. Mobile Nos.9868040314, 9810415014.

From: http://sclsc.nic.in/Aor.html

advocate-supreme-court-of-india.blogspot.com

Law Schools in India

from http://wapedia.mobi/en/List_of_law_schools_in_India

Contents:

1. National Capital
Region of Delhi


2. Andhra
Pradesh

3. Bihar

4.
Chhattisgarh

5. Goa

6. Gujarat

7. Haryana

8.
Karnataka

9. Kerala

10. Madhya
Pradesh


11.
Maharashtra

12. Orissa

13. Punjab

14.
Puducherry

15.
Rajasthan

16. Tamil
Nadu

17. Uttar
Pradesh

18. West
Bengal

19. See
also

1. National Capital Region of Delhi

• National Law
  University, Delhi (Official Website)
• 
  University School of Law and Legal Studies, Guru Gobind Singh
  Indraprastha University,Delhi
• Amity Law School, Noida (Constituent college of Amity
  University)
• Amity Law School, New Delhi
  (affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University)
• Faculty of
  Law, University of Delhi, New Delhi
• Faculty of Law, Jamia Millia
  Islamia, New Delhi
• Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, New Delhi
  (affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University)

2. Andhra Pradesh

• Andhra University College of Law, Visakhapatnam
• Nalsar University of
  Law, Hyderabad
• Osmania University College of Law, Osmania University,
  Hyderabad
• Paddala Ram Reddi Law College, Hyderabad (affiliated to Osmania
  University)
• Pendekanti Law College, Hyderabad (affiliated to
  Osmania University)

3. Bihar

• Chanakya
  National Law University, Patna
• Patna Law College ,Patna
  University,Patna
• C M Law College ,Lalit
  Narayan Mithila University,Patna

4. Chhattisgarh

• MATS Law
  School([1]) of MATS University, Raipur, the Next
  Generation Law School is providing Highest Quality Professional
  Legal Education to Prepare Law Students to meet the new challenges
  and dimensions of Internationalization of Legal Profession. It
  offers a 5 year B.B.A. LL.B. (Honours) Degree Program with Dual
  Specialization and Career oriented Value Additions intended to
  equip its students for a Multi Jurisdictional Practice.

• Hidyatullah
  National Law University, Raipur

5. Goa

• V.M. Salgaocar Law College, Panjim
  (affiliated to Goa University)

VVM's Govind Ramnath College of
Law,Margao(affiliated to Goa University)

6. Gujarat

• 
  Baroda School of Legal Studies, Faculty of Law, M.S. University of
  Baroda, Vadodara
• Gujarat National
  Law University, Gandhinagar
• Nirma University, Ahmedabad
• VT Chowksi Law College, Surat
• Daboo Law College, Navsari
• SKM Law College, Valsad

7. Haryana

• Jindal Global Law
  School (JGLS), Jindal Global University, Sonipat, Haryana
• Department of Law, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak
• Institute of Law, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra
• Department of law, B.P.s.women university[sonipat]

8. Karnataka

• CMR Law School, Bangalore
  (Affiliated to Karnataka State Law University)
• R.L.Law College-Belgaum,(KLS`S
  Societies),(Affiliated to the Karnataka University)
• Govt Law College of Ranebennur,(Affiliated to the Karnataka University)
• Hurkadli Ajja Law College-Dharwad,(Affiliated to the Karnataka University)
• Bangalore Institute of Legal Studies, Bangalore (affiliated to
  Bangalore University)
• M.S. Ramaiah College of Law, Bangalore (affiliated to Bangalore
  University)
• School of Law, Christ
  University, Bangalore
• Indira Priyadarshini College of Law, Bangalore (affiliated to
  Karntaka State Law University)offers LLB.& BA,LLB,.
• Jagadguru Sri Shivarathrishwara Law College, Mysore (affiliated
  to University of Mysore)
• K.L.E. Society's Law College, Bangalore (affiliated to
  Bangalore University)
• National
  Law School of India University, Bangalore
• University College of Law, Karnataka University, Dharwad
• University Law
  College, Bangalore University, Bangalore
• Vaikunta Baliga College of Law, Udupi
• Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheswara Law College and Centre for
  Post Graduate Studies in Law [2], Mangalore affiliated to Mangalore
  University
• Vivekananda College of Law, Bangalore (affiliated to Bangalore
  University)
• Bishop cotton Women's Christian Law college Bangalore
  (Affiliated to Bangalore University)
• B.M.S College of Law, Bangalore (Affiliated to Bangalore
  University)
• S. B. R. R. Mahajana Law
  college, Mysore (Affiliated to
  University of Mysore)
• Saradavilas Law College, Mysore
  (Affiliated to University of Mysore)
• Vaikunta Baliga College of Law, Udupi
• Vidyavardhaka Law College, Mysore
  (Affiliated to University of Mysore)
• M. Krishna Law College, Hassan
  (Affiliated to University of Mysore)
• PES Law College, Mandya (Affiliated to
  University of Mysore)

9. Kerala

• Government Law College, Thiruvananthapuram, under Kerala University, Thiruvananthapuram
• Government Law College, Ernakulam, under Mahatma Gandhi University,
  
  Kottayam
• Government Law College, Thrissur, under Calicut University, Calicut
• Government Law
  College, Calicut, under Calicut University, Calicut
• Kerala Law Academy Law College, Thiruvananthapuram (affiliated to
  Kerala University)
• National
  University of Advanced Legal Studies, Kochi
• School of Legal Studies, Cochin University
  of Science and Technology, Kochi
• School of Indian Legal Thought, Mahatma Gandhi University,
  Kottayam
• Center for Legal Studies, Kannur University, Kannur

10. Madhya Pradesh

• Department of Law, Rani Durgavati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur
• Faculty of Law, Dr. Harisingh Gour University, Sagar, Madhya
  PradeshSagar
• National Law
  Institute University, Bhopal
• School of Law, Devi
  Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya, Indore

11. Maharashtra

• N.C.Law College, Nanded (Swami Ramanand Tirth Marathwada
  University, Nanded)
• S.C.P. Law College, Nanded (Swami Ramanand Tirth Marathwada
  University, Nanded)
• V.N. Law College, Nanded (Swami Ramanand Tirth Marathwada
  University, Nanded)
• Shri Sivaji Law College, Kandhar, Nanded (Swami Ramanand Tirth
  Marathwada University, Nanded)
• DES LAW COLLEGE, PUNE (affiliated to the University of
  Pune)
• Rizvi Law College,Mumbai (affiliated to the University of
  Mumbai)
• A.K. Khan Law College, Pune (affiliated
  to the University of Pune)
• Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh College of Law, Amravati (affiliated to
  Sant Gadge Baba Amaravati University)
• G.J. Advani Law College, Mumbai (affiliated to the University
  of Mumbai)
• Government Law
  College, Mumbai (affiliated to the University of Mumbai)
• ILS Law College, Pune (affiliated to the University of Pune)
• New Law College, Bharati Vidyapeeth University, Pune
• M.P. Law College, Aurangabad (affiliated to Dr. Babasaheb
  Ambedkar Marathwada University)
• K.C. Law College, Mumbai (affiliated to the University of
  Mumbai)
• S.V.K.M'S College Of Law (affiliated to the University OF
  Mumbai)
• Symbiosis Law School,
  Pune (Symbiosis
  International University)
• New Law College, Mumbai(affiliated to the University of
  Mumbai)
• Narhar Balwant Thakur College of Law, Nasik (affiliated to the
  University of Pune)
• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College of Law (BACL), Nagpur University,
  Nagpur.
• P. E. Society's Modern Law
  College, Pune[3] (University of Pune)
• Ambedkar Law College, Dhule

12. Orissa

• National Law
  University, Orissa - The group of premier law schools in
  India.
• KIIT Law School, Bhubaneswar (Affiliated to KIIT University) Offers BA LLB, BBA LLB
  and BSc. LLB degrees
• University Law College,Bani vihar, Bhubaneswar
• M.S. Law College, Cuttack
• Jeypore Law college, Jeypore (Koraput)
• Lingaraj Law College,
  Brahmapur
• Dhenkanal Law College,
  Dhenkanal

13. Punjab

• Army Institute of Law, Mohali
  (affiliated to Punjabi University, Patiala)
• Department of Laws, Punjabi University, Patiala
• Department of Laws, Panjab University, Chandigarh
• Department of Laws, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
• Department of Laws, Guru Nanak Dev University Regional Campus,
  Gurdaspur
• Rajiv
  Gandhi National University of Law, Patiala
• University Institute of Legal Studies, Chandigarh
• St. Soldier Law Collage, Behind REC, GT Road, Jalandhar
• Baba Kundan Singh Memorial Law College Moga (Affiliated to
  Panjab University,Chandigarh)

14. Puducherry

• Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College, Puducherry, [affiliated to
  Pondicherry University]

15. Rajasthan

• National Law
  University, Jodhpur
• Faculty of Law, Jai Narayan Vyas University, Jodhpur
• Faculty of Law, Rajasthan University, Jaipur

16. Tamil Nadu

• Tamil Nadu
  Dr. Ambedkar Law University, madras
• Saveetha School of
  Law,Chennai

17. Uttar Pradesh

• Department of Law, D.A.V. Degree College, Muzaffarnagar (Meerut
  University)
• Department of Law, Meerut College, Meerut (Meerut
  University)
• Department of Law, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies,
  Dehradun
• Faculty of Law, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh (Central
  University)
• Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (Central
  University)
• Institute of Legal Studies, Meerut University Campus
  (Meerut)
• Dr.
  Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University, Lucknow
• Faculty of Law, Allahabad University, Allahabad (Central
  University)
• Faculty of Law, Dr. Bhim Rao Ambedkar
  University, (Agra)
• Faculty of Law, R.B.S. College, (Agra)
• Faculty of Law, Agra College, (Agra)
• Faculty of Law, University of Lucknow (New Campus),
  Lucknow

18. West Bengal

• Indian
  Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, Rajiv Gandhi
  School of Intellectual Property Law
• Department of Law,
  University of Calcutta, Kolkata
• West
  Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata
• Jalpaiguri Law College, Jalpaiguri, (affiliated to the University of North
  Bengal)
• Jogesh Chandra Chowdhury Law College, Kolkata (Affiliated to
  University of
  Calcutta)
• South Calcutta Law College (Affiliated to University of
  Calcutta)
• Surendranath Law College, Kolkata (Affiliated to University of Calcutta)
• Bengal Law College, Shantiniketan (Affiliated to University of Burdwan)
• Snehangshu Kanta Acharya Institute of law,Kalyani (Affiliated
  to University of Kalyani)
• Bimal Chandra College of Law, Murshidabad (Affiliated to
  University of Kalyani)
• Haldia Law College,Haldia,(Affiliated to Vidyasagar
  University)
• Midnapore Law College, Midnapore,(Affiliated to Vidyasagar
  University)
• Sarsuna Law College, Sarsuna(Midnapore),(Affiliated to
  Vidyasagar University)
• Department of Law, University of Burdwan, Burdwan
• Hoogly Mohsin College, Hoogly, (Affiliated to University of
  Burdwan)
• Law College Durgapur, (Affiliated to University of
  Burdwan)
• Kingston law College, Barasat (Affiliated to West Bengal State
  University)

19. See also

• Common Law Admission
  Test
• Legal Education in
  India
• Autonomous law
  schools in India

• [[|d]] • Autonomous Law Schools in India
Public	Chanakya National Law University • Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia National Law University • Gujarat National Law University • Hidayatullah National Law University • NALSAR University of Law • National Law Institute University • National Law School of India University • National Law University, Delhi • National Law University, Jodhpur • National Law University, Orissa • National University of Advanced Legal Studies • Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law • Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University • The West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences
Private	Amity Law School • Jindal Global Law School • KIIT Law School • School of Law, Christ University • Symbiosis Law School . Institute of Law, Nirma University
Legal education in India • List of law schools in India

• [[|d]] • List of law schools in Asia
Sovereign states	Afghanistan · Armenia1· Azerbaijan1· Bahrain · Bangladesh · Bhutan · Brunei · Burma2· Cambodia · People's Republic of China · Cyprus1· East Timor3· Egypt4· Georgia4· India · Indonesia · Iran · Iraq · Israel · Japan · Jordan · Kazakhstan4· North Korea · South Korea · Kuwait · Kyrgyzstan · Laos · Lebanon · Malaysia · Maldives · Mongolia · Nepal · Oman · Pakistan · Philippines · Qatar · Russia4· Saudi Arabia · Singapore · Sri Lanka · Syria · Tajikistan · Republic of China5· Thailand · Turkey4· Turkmenistan · United Arab Emirates · Uzbekistan · Vietnam · Yemen
States with limited recognition	Abkhazia1· Nagorno-Karabakh · Northern Cyprus · Palestine · South Ossetia1·
Dependencies, autonomies, other territories	Aceh · Adjara1· Akrotiri and Dhekelia · Altai · British Indian Ocean Territory · Buryatia · Christmas Island · Cocos (Keeling) Islands · Guangxi · Hong Kong · Inner Mongolia · Iraqi Kurdistan · Khakassia · Macau · Nakhchivan · Ningxia · Papua · Sakha Republic · Tibet · Tuva · West Papua · Xinjiang · About Me Rishabh Sancheti Advocate Supreme Court of India Rishabh Sancheti is an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India. View my complete profile Simple theme. Theme images by Roofoo. Powered by Blogger.