The complete, searchable course plan for Constitutional Law-I (Course Codes 21LLLC101 / 21LALC202 / 21LBLC202 / 21LCLC202) — every unit, topic, session count, the full 54-case reading list, prescribed and reference books, and the ISA evaluation scheme.
By the end of this course, students will be able to:
Sixty-five sessions across five units. Each topic below lists its planned number of sessions and the pedagogy used to teach it.
The Government of India Act, 1935; the Indian Independence Act, 1947; drafting committees and Constituent Assembly debates.
Lecture MethodModern, lengthy and written Constitution; Preamble - Socialist, Welfare, Secular and Responsible Government; Federal and Unitary features; Fundamental Rights, minorities and backward classes, elections; independent judiciary; rigid and flexible amendment; Parliamentary and Presidential form of government; universal adult franchise and single citizenship; emergency provisions; three-tier government, and more.
Lecture MethodMeaning, scope, importance and objectives; the values enshrined in the Preamble.
Flip Classroom MethodLaw, law in force, and the territory of India; Article 13 - pre- and post-constitutional laws; the Doctrine of Eclipse, Severability and Waiver; Judicial Review.
Lecture MethodDifferences between fundamental rights and human rights.
Lecture MethodArticle 12, definition of “State”; other authorities - judicial interpretation.
Lecture MethodPositive obligations (to protect, promote and fulfil) and negative obligations.
Lecture MethodArticles 13 and 368; amendment procedure; limitations; the Basic Structure theory.
Lecture MethodArticles 32 and 226; the five writs - Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Certiorari, Quo Warranto and Prohibition; judicial activism.
Flip Classroom MethodEquality before law and equal protection of law; reasonable classification - intelligible differentia and rational nexus; legitimate expectation, reasonableness and fairness; principles of natural justice - Audi Alteram Partem and Nemo Judex in Causa Sua.
Lecture Method and Flip ClassroomProtection against discrimination; prohibitive grounds of discrimination; affirmative action / protective discrimination; amendments under Article 15.
Lecture MethodEquality of opportunity; prohibition of discrimination; reservations for backward classes; exceptions and interpretations - creamy layer, carry-forward rule.
Lecture MethodProhibition of titles by the State; exceptions.
Lecture MethodArticles 23 and 24 - prohibition of forced and bonded labour, and protection from trafficking.
Lecture MethodMeaning, nature and scope; judicial interpretations and new dimensions - the various facets of Article 21; differences between ‘due process of law’ and ‘procedure established by law’.
Seminar MethodFreedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, profession, trade, business or occupation; facets of freedom of speech and expression; reasonable restrictions under Articles 19(2) to 19(6); the Doctrine of Proportionality - legitimate aim, fairness and reasonableness.
Flip Classroom MethodProtection against arbitrary arrest and detention; ex post facto law; double jeopardy; self-incrimination.
Lecture MethodSecularism and religious denomination; the Essential Religious Practice test, convention and constitutional morality; freedom of conscience and religion, managing religious affairs, freedom from paying taxes for the promotion of religion, and freedom from attending religious instruction.
Lecture MethodProtection of minority interests; the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.
Lecture MethodNature and scope; purpose and significance; enforceability - Part III and Part IV.
Lecture MethodJudicial review and the Ninth Schedule; the Basic Structure doctrine.
Lecture MethodArticle 51-A; significance and enforceability.
Flip Classroom MethodAs furnished in the course plan. Use the search box above to jump straight to a case by party name or citation.
Note: two case titles (Golaknath and Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain) are repeated in the original course plan document; both occurrences are retained above to match the source exactly.
| Assessment | Weightage (marks) |
|---|---|
| Mid-term exam | 15 |
| Teacher-Evolved Assessment Method I — Moot Court | 15 |
| Teacher-Evolved Assessment Method II — Case Analysis | 15 |
| Attendance | 05 |
| Total (ISA) | 50 |
Students are given a moot problem. By draw of lots, each student is assigned a side (petitioner or respondent) and prepares a written memorial for that side. During the actual moot, students present oral arguments for a maximum of 15 minutes. Bloom’s levels 2–5; course outcomes 3 and 6.
| Component | Marks |
|---|---|
| Memorial (total 7) | 7 |
| Understanding of essential legal issues | 1.5 |
| Understanding of facts | 1.5 |
| Proper use of citation | 1 |
| Effective use of authority to support arguments | 1.5 |
| Format | 1.5 |
| Presentation (total 8) | 8 |
| Knowledge of facts | 1.5 |
| Logic and reasoning | 1.5 |
| Persuasiveness and deference to the court | 1 |
| Analysis of legal issues | 2 |
| Knowledge and use of legal sources | 2 |
Marks breakdown transcribed as furnished in the course plan; the Memorial line item totals 7 marks overall even though its own listed sub-items sum to slightly more — this reflects the source document as supplied, not a transcription choice.
| Criteria | 4 (Good) | 3 (Average) | 2 (Needs improvement) | 1 (Poor) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language proficiency | Argument clearly conveyed; body language is confident and controlled. | Good, coherent statements; body language is good. | Language riddled with grammar errors. | Language not decipherable; incoherent statements. |
| Analysis of law & facts in arguments | Wholly relevant, based on facts and data. | Somewhat relevant; some facts mentioned. | Irrelevant and not based on facts. | No legal analysis. |
| Originality of argument | Strong, well-reasoned and well-articulated central argument. | Original central argument, well-reasoned but not well-articulated. | A central argument exists but lacks originality. | No central argument. |
| Logic & research | Strong, data-driven, interdisciplinary research; faultless logic. | Research reflects the debate’s points, data-driven and well-reasoned. | Little or no research behind the argument. | — |
Each student is allocated two case laws by the course teacher and prepares a case analysis using the FILAC method (Facts, Issues, Law, Analysis, Conclusion), written in class under supervision within a maximum of 45 minutes. Minimum 1,000 words per case (2,000 words / six pages total). Bloom’s levels 2–4; course outcomes 1–5.
| Element | Excellent (4) | Good (3) | Fair (2) | Average (1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Facts | All material facts identified, stated lucidly and precisely. | Partially identified, stated appropriately. | Incorrect identification, stated inappropriately. | |
| Issues | All relevant issues identified, well structured. | Partially identified, fairly structured. | Incorrectly identified / unable to identify, lacks structure. | |
| Legislation used | — | All relevant laws identified with thorough understanding. | Incorrect identification, incomplete understanding. | |
| Analysis | All issues and laws analysed effectively. | Partially analysed issues and laws applicable. | Incorrect analysis, or failed to analyse issues and laws. | |
| Conclusion | — | Well-founded, flows from proper analysis. | Inappropriate, does not flow from analysis. | |
The original rubric table has an irregular grid (some cells apply across two grade columns). The reconstruction above preserves the wording exactly but merges cells where the source did.
| Course outcome | Weightage in assessment |
|---|---|
| CO1 | 20 |
| CO2 | 20 |
| CO3 | 20 |
| CO4 | 20 |
| CO5 | 20 |
| Total | 100 |