Nagpur: Serious questions have been raised over the admission process for the Ph.D. Programme (2025–26) at Maharashtra National Law University (MNLU), Nagpur, following allegations that the provisional selection list violates statutory reservation norms and the university’s own advertised seat matrix.
According to information placed in the public domain, MNLU Nagpur had officially advertised 35 seats for the Ph.D. programme with mandatory reservations as per Maharashtra State norms. However, the provisional admission list issued by the university (Ref: MNLU/DC/2026/93) on February 3, 2026, allegedly reflects glaring deviations from the notified reservation structure.
Gold Rate
04 Feb 2026
As per the advertised seat matrix, five seats were reserved for Scheduled Castes (SC), two for Scheduled Tribes (ST), and four for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBC). However, the provisional selection list reportedly shows zero candidates selected from all three categories. Similarly, the university allegedly failed to fill seats earmarked for De-notified Tribes (VJ-A), Nomadic Tribes (NT-C), and Nomadic Tribes (NT-D), despite one seat each being specifically allocated to these categories.
In contrast, while only 12 seats were notified for the Unreserved (General) category, the provisional list reportedly includes 22 candidates under this category, nearly double the sanctioned number, raising concerns that seats meant for reserved categories were diverted to general candidates.
Legal experts have pointed out that as a National Law University established under the Maharashtra National Law University Act, 2014, MNLU Nagpur is statutorily bound to follow constitutional reservation policies and state legislation. The alleged deviations have raised serious questions about the transparency, legality, and fairness of the Doctoral Council’s selection process.
Advocate Dipak Kharat, who has brought the issue to light, stated that the discrepancies warrant urgent scrutiny in the larger public interest, particularly given the impact on access to legal education for marginalised communities. He has also submitted copies of the official seat matrix notification and the provisional selection list for verification.
The university administration had not issued any official clarification on the alleged discrepancies so far.
The matter is expected to draw further attention, with demands growing for an independent inquiry to ensure accountability and adherence to reservation laws in higher legal education.
