Law colleges under the University of Mumbai have agreed to pay fines “under protest” to meet the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) crucial portal deadline of July 31, despite ongoing legal scrutiny by the Bombay High Court. The court will soon deliberate whether these penalties and the associated 50% reduction in student intake are legally warranted.
The case, titled Shri Hari Educational Trust v. University of Mumbai & Ors, involves multiple unaided law colleges, including Mahatma Gandhi Missions Law College, Agnel School of Law, Gokhale Education Society’s Law College, and Janta Shikshan Mandal’s Adv Datta Patil College of Law, among others. These institutions have jointly filed writ petitions before Justices RI Chagla and Farhan Dubash.
The crux of the petitions is a shared grievance against the University of Mumbai’s last-minute actions. These actions entail penalizing colleges for alleged deficiencies like the ‘non-approval’ of faculty, leading to a 50% cut in seats and imposition of significant fines, just ahead of the 2026-27 admissions cycle.
The colleges are seeking protection against these measures. They argue that despite complying with BCI’s eligibility norms for faculty, the university is imposing penalties amounting to roughly ₹10 lakh per institution. The petitioners demand that the court ensure that the upcoming admissions are not adversely affected by these sudden punitive actions.
The colleges’ counsel contended that the faculty at these institutions are deemed “eligible” under the BCI’s Legal Education Rules. They argue that any delay in approval is due to the university’s procedural inefficiencies. The legal representatives highlighted that BCI norms allow for full-time faculty drawn from the Bar and retired judicial officers, suggesting that these rules should supersede the rigid University Grants Commission (UGC) criteria, given compliance with BCI’s minimum standards.
More Read
According to the colleges, they sought continued affiliation in December 2025. However, the university communicated its punitive measures, including a ₹10 lakh penalty and reduced intake, only on July 20, 2026, perilously close to the BCI’s July 31 deadline.
The University’s counsel countered by stating that the colleges had provided a statutory undertaking at the time of affiliation, committing to appoint faculty strictly according to prescribed qualifications. The counsel justified regulatory actions such as disaffiliation under the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, citing long-term non-compliance.
The University accused colleges of not issuing timely all-India advertisements, failing to form selection committees, and neglecting to submit selection reports for approval, leading to prolonged compliance gaps. The argument was that inadequate recruitment compromises legal education quality, allowing colleges to underpay faculty and avoid full pay-commission scales.
More Read
The Bench urged the university to establish clear timelines for processing advertisements and approvals, emphasizing that institutions should not be left with minimal time to comply with statutory deadlines. It was noted that the BCI had set July 31 as the final date for application uploads, with exceptions considered only in extraordinary circumstances.
As a temporary measure, the colleges have agreed to pay the fines “under protest” and accept a reduced intake so that the University of Mumbai can issue conditional affiliation. They have committed to uploading required documents on the BCI portal by the deadline and paying any late fees.
The Court acknowledged these commitments and plans to examine next week whether the imposed penalties and seat reductions are justified and whether the university’s affiliation and approval procedures are equitable for both colleges and students.
