5 min readHyderabadUpdated: Aug 17, 2026 06:31 PM IST
Weeks after a section of students at Hyderabad’s NALSAR University of Law had opposed having Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant as the chief guest at their convocation, the mood at the campus seems to be shifting — not least because of how the controversy unfolded over the days that followed.
Even as the university was awaiting a response from the CJI to the invite, on August 13, BCI chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra issued two letters, within a gap of a few hours. While the first one stated that the state bar councils should not enrol the students of the 2026 batch of NALSAR, the subsequent letter retracted this order, but asked for an inquiry into the protests against the CJI on campus. Later, this directive was dropped as well. On August 14, BCI received a rebuke from the CJI himself, who asked, “Who are they (BCI) to unnecessarily raise an issue?” A day later, it was Mishra’s turn to issue an apology letter to the law students.
The Indian Express spoke to many students on the campus who said, on the condition of anonymity, that they were happy that the controversy was finally being put to rest. Quite a few of them even seemed amenable to the idea of having the CJI on the campus – a possibility that had triggered the protests in the first place.
“We just want the convocation to happen. I personally don’t care if the CJI comes or not,” a student of the batch of 2026, which had first objected to the presence of the CJI on the campus, told The Indian Express.
Another student of the same batch said, “The university administration had unofficially communicated that there could be a convocation with the CJI or no convocation at all. The predominant mood in the batch of ’26 is that we want a convocation.”
The university has 1,400 students on the campus. Of these, 450 had expressed their opposition to the CJI’s presence, citing his recent comments with regard to a petition against alleged police excesses during the NEET protests in Delhi.
The opposition came even before the university extended a formal invite to the CJI, based on a long-held convention of having the incumbent CJI as the chief guest at convocations.
Story continues below this ad
A student of the batch of ’27, which is yet to graduate, said, “We are not sure why the CJI would want to come to a campus where 450 students had asked for his absence. But if he comes, we will not protest. We have already communicated what we had to, that frivolous statements cannot be made by a high and esteemed office.”
When contacted, the University administration did not share when the convocation would be held even though it confirmed that an invitation had been extended to the CJI and a response awaited.
“They are most probably going to spring it as a surprise on us and give us a two-week notice or so to avoid controversy,” a student of the batch of ’26 said.
‘Convocation about students, not CJI’
Students say they want the convocation because it is about them, and not the CJI anymore. “We know that there are students whose families have never attended a convocation. There are students who are the first in their families to reach college and that too a prestigious one like NALSAR. This convocation is about such students and not about the CJI. We are ready to participate in it,” a student said.
Story continues below this ad
In writing a letter of protest, the students upheld the long history of dissent on campus, they said. “In NALSAR, there is a protest almost every semester for students’ rights. This was also one among them. And we succeeded in it,” a student said.
Part of the acceptance of the CJI on campus is also because of what he said while hearing a recent petition against the BCI’s controversial directive. While hearing a plea challenging the now-withdrawn directive, the CJI said on August 14, “BCI is unnecessarily taking action. If the students have a cause to protest, they have the right to protest. Students might have written a letter to me. It’s a dialogue between students and me. Who are they (BCI) to unnecessarily raise an issue? This is totally uncalled for. BCI has nothing to do with this.”
Said a student: “There were four letters issued in favour of NALSAR by August 15 morning. We were wondering if the Bar Council would budge. They did; their chairman apologised to law students of the country the same evening.”
