Ph.D.: Test Pattern and Syllabus
The Ph.D. entrance tests research potential rather than mere subject knowledge. It normally combines research aptitude and methodology, a subject-specific paper in law, and an interview or proposal discussion. The written paper may ask for short answers, essay-type responses, and a research design; the interview tests whether your proposed topic is viable, original, and ethically sound.
Core expectations
- Research methodology: problem identification, literature review, hypothesis or research question, doctrinal and empirical methods, sampling, and citation.
- Legal theory: ability to connect doctrine to broader theoretical debates.
- Subject specialisation: depth in the area you propose to research.
- Proposal quality: a clear gap, feasible scope, and an appropriate method.
Worked example
Proposed topic: “Algorithmic credit scoring and the right to equality in India.” Reasoning: A strong answer identifies the doctrinal question-whether opaque scoring creates indirect discrimination-and chooses a method: doctrinal analysis of Article 14 and data-protection law, plus comparative material. It states a literature gap and a feasible scope. A weak answer simply describes what AI is or proposes “AI and law” without a research question.
Traps that cost marks
Confusing method with methodology; choosing a topic too broad to finish; copying a proposal without a literature gap; ignoring research ethics and data access; citing cases without extracting the principle.