Back
Takes 3.0 to Law Campus with Student Competition
In a significant step toward embedding
culture within legal education, the
, in association with the
)
, organised a student
competition at
. The event, themed
"Taking
to the Roots Through Campus-Based
Competitions – An Initiative under
3.0
Drive,"
is part of a broader vision led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha of the
and guided by Justice P.P. Sahu to strengthen
as an integral component of contemporary justice delivery.
The initiative represents a deliberate shift from viewing solely as a tool to cultivating a culture where dialogue and precede . By bringing to the campus, the Durg judiciary aims to introduce future lawyers to the principles of before they enter the courtroom.
The Window That Opened More Than Light
The competition featured two simulated disputes designed to move participants beyond conventional adversarial reasoning. The first involved neighbouring families separated by an eighteen-year relationship that had been disturbed by a dispute over the construction of a window. On the surface, it appeared to be a binary issue: one family wanted light and ventilation for an elderly mother's room, while the other raised privacy and security concerns. But beneath the stated positions lay deeper interests—care for a parent, dignity, safety, and the preservation of a long-standing bond.
The second proposition concerned two brothers disputing their late father's family business. One brother had continued to manage and invest in the business, while the other sought his share to fund his daughter's higher education. Neither wanted the business to close. The competition encouraged students to identify the underlying interests: financial necessity, education, livelihood, and the preservation of family relationships. As the organisers noted,
"These propositions illustrate one of the central intellectual differences between
and conventional litigation: the position asserted by a party does not necessarily reveal the interest that the party is actually seeking to protect."
This shift—from positions to interests—is at the heart of effective . The competition aimed to develop in students the ability to listen, empathise, and creatively problem-solve, rather than simply marshal arguments in support of a predetermined stance.
Beyond 'Who is Right?': Cultivating a New Skill Set
Traditional legal education predominantly trains lawyers in and . Students learn to identify facts, formulate issues, and construct arguments to win cases. requires a distinct professional skill set—one that is often underemphasised in law schools. A future lawyer must also know when a client's stated position conceals a larger concern, when a seemingly irreconcilable dispute contains room for accommodation, and when preserving a relationship is more valuable than a purely legal victory.
The Durg initiative sought to address this gap. By participating in simulated mediations, students practiced communication, patience, negotiation, and creative problem-solving. They learned that a mediator's effectiveness depends not on how much they speak, but on their ability to listen, understand, and facilitate meaningful communication between parties. The programme conveyed a broader message: the contemporary legal professional must be able not only to contest a dispute effectively, but also to identify when it can be more meaningfully resolved through consensual means.
as
One of the most significant aspects of the initiative was its framing of
beyond case management. The organisers emphasised that
should not be treated merely as a procedural device for reducing
. As stated during the programme,
"If
is viewed only as a procedural device for settling cases after litigation has commenced, its role remains largely reactive."
Instead, the event situated within the constitutional objective of . embodies the commitment to equal justice and , while the provides a robust statutory framework. A prolonged family dispute can permanently damage relationships; a commercial dispute can affect ongoing business ties. The financial and emotional costs of litigation often extend well beyond the eventual judgment. , where appropriate, offers a different model: the parties themselves participate in constructing a solution rather than leaving the outcome entirely to an adjudicator. This approach preserves relationships and empowers individuals.
Judicial Participation and Institutional Support
The competition was attended by several judicial officers, including Shri Anish Dubey, District and Additional Sessions Judge; Smt. Sushma Lakra, Chairman, ; Shri Bhupesh Kumar Basant, Chief Judicial Magistrate; Shri Umesh Kumar Bhagwatkar, Secretary, ; Smt. Kamini Jaiswal, Civil Judge (Senior Division); and Smt. Aishwarya Diwan, Civil Judge (Junior Division). The initiative is being guided at the district level by Shri K. Vinod Kujur, Principal District and Sessions Judge and Chairman, , Durg. Bharati University provided the campus platform, underscoring the collaborative effort between the judiciary and educational institutions.
From Courtroom to Campus to Community
The larger significance of the Durg initiative lies in its attempt to treat not merely as a post-litigation mechanism, but as a culture of conflict resolution. A statutory framework can provide architecture; courts can make referrals; institutions can create centres. But long-term acceptance depends on whether lawyers, litigants, and communities begin to regard dialogue and as legitimate and effective responses to conflict.
The campus becomes an important site for 3.0 because it shapes the mindset of the next generation of legal professionals. The initiative seeks to take from courtrooms to campuses, and progressively from campuses to communities. The objective is to build greater awareness, confidence, and acceptance of at the grassroots level.
The fundamental question posed by the programme is not whether every dispute can or should be mediated. It is whether the legal system can cultivate a generation of lawyers who, before turning every conflict into litigation, are trained to ask a more foundational question: What is the real problem—and can the parties themselves be helped to solve it?
By embedding education at the law campus, the has taken a decisive step toward answering that question with a resounding affirmative.
