Prof. Dr. Hiranmaya Nanda, Associate Professor at KIIT School of Law, Bhubaneswar on his Journey Through Law, Laughter, and Learning

Interview conducted by Somya shree swagatika nayak as a part of her Campus Leaders Program.

Please introduce yourself professor

I am Dr. Hiranmaya Nanda, Associate Professor and Head of the Family Law Department at School of Law, KIIT-DU. With over 14 years in legal academia, I have dedicated my career to fostering meaningful legal education, especially in areas like personal laws, contract law, and medical jurisprudence.

I hold a Ph.D. in Law with my thesis focusing on systemic judicial delays in the state of Odisha. Apart from teaching, I contribute actively to judicial training at the Odisha Judicial Academy and have published over 60 research papers in reputed journals. My aim has always been to make law relatable, relevant, and responsive to the times we live in, and to dedicate my life to society as a social engineer.

This inspiration I have derived from my grandfather Choudhury Bichitrananda Nanda, who was the first Director of Education in the State of Odisha.

Having been a fundamental pillar at SOA National Institute of Law and currently an integral member of KIIT School of Law, how would you assess the instructional philosophies and institutional cultures of both institutions?

Both institutions have played pivotal roles in shaping my academic journey. At SOA, I witnessed the evolution of a young law school striving for identity, where instructional methods were more traditional yet foundational. It gave me the opportunity to participate in an institution building from the ground up.

Where as KIIT, on the other hand, offers a more structured and globally oriented environment, integrating technology, research, and international exposure into pedagogy. While SOA nurtured my grounding, KIIT challenges me to innovate bridging doctrinal understanding with contemporary legal application.

KIIT has been a globally acclaimed institution, where the Hon’ble Founder, Prof. Achyuta Samanta Sir, has created a hub of education and research excellence for both students and teachers. His vision is deeply rooted in humanity and encourages us to reflect on three essential questions: What were you? What are you? And what will you be?

Even the backbenchers and mischievous students seem fully engaged in your classroom. What’s your secret to turning distraction into dedication?”

A job of a teacher is to transcript the minds of the student and deliver in the simple language that they understand .My secret lies in storytelling and Socratic questioning. Law isn’t just about provisions, it’s about people, conflicts, resolutions, and evolving ethics. I often begin with a real-life anecdote or a provocative question. I also personalize engagement, emembering students’ names, encouraging their questions, even celebrating their small academic wins. I treat even casual resistance not as disinterest, but as potential waiting to be redirected. I believe that holding students’ attention in the classroom is crucial for effective teaching. Occasionally, a touch of healthy humour also plays a pivotal role in keeping them engaged

Is there any personal story you share in the class  which turns a complex or boring legal topic come alive for your students?

As rightly said Classrooms are the fertile soil to research, therefore learning inside the classroom yields the best product. Absolutely. One instance that resonates with students is when I share my own initial confusion as a law student trying to decipher family law doctrines.

I narrate how a complex doctrine like spes successionis made sense to me only when I related it to a family land dispute in my village. Students suddenly connect abstract concepts with everyday conflicts.

Personalization demystifies the subject. Moreover, stories from the Mahabharata and Ramayana that resonate with contemporary legal provisions often make the classroom experience more engaging and memorable for students.

You’re known for your remarkable ability to recall not just legal provisions, but even their exact placement in the Bare Act. How did you develop this skill—and is it something students can cultivate, or does it come naturally?

It was born more out of necessity than talent. As a student, while studying the provisions, I would constantly recapitulate them in my memory. I believe in first remembering the skeleton of the law, and then adding flesh and blood in the form of the actual provisions.

Furthermore, before explaining the Bare Act provisions, it is essential to help students understand the root and objective behind the law and to understand the intention of the legislature. This narrative approach makes it easier for students to remember the provisions effectively.

As a teacher, my duty is not to cover the syllabus rather to uncover the syllabus.I always to be addressed as learning teacher rather as learned teacher. Learned is a past action and learning is present and I am learning everyday and every sphere of my life.

Based on your experience, what is the predominant misperception students have regarding personal laws, and how do you address or elucidate these misunderstandings during classroom discussions?

Society is not a static concept; it changes day by day. Therefore, the law must evolve to meet the needs of society. Many students assume personal laws are static, outdated, or purely religious. The first task is to instill in the minds of students that personal laws are nothing but person-based laws.

They overlook the internal dynamism how interpretations evolve, how customary practices affect application, or how constitutional scrutiny shapes their future. There are many landmark decisions by the honourable court where I discuss In class, I present diverse case studies from Shayara Bano to Joseph Shine to  show how personal laws are living instruments, constantly challenged and redefined.

In a recent judgment by the Apex Court, it was observed that what constitutes cruelty for a man may not be the same for a woman. This gender specific interpretation needs to be clearly explained in the classroom.

With instant digital access to statutes in today’s legal education, do you think memorization of section and case names still has its use? Or ought to our energy go completely towards developing conceptual clarity, reasoning, and application of law? Some students  don’t fully understand the deeper purpose, reasoning, or context behind those legal provisions. They may know what the law says, but not why it says so. How do you balance the right thing in your classroom?

It is important to memorize what needs to be memorized—like our history, key events, chemical reactions, or the periodic classification. However, one cannot master any subject through memorization alone; it requires fundamental clarity and in-depth understanding, which must go hand in hand.

Even when all these elements are applied together, the outcomes can vary depending on individual IQ levels. When it comes to understanding the law, I often begin with the question, ‘What does the section say?’, followed by ‘Why does it say so?’, and conclude with ‘Should it still say this today?’ This three-step approach effectively bridges memory, reasoning, and reform.

If you were to draft a charter of guiding values for modern legal educators—rooted in the jurisprudential wisdom of the Dharmaśāstra—what three principles would you include, and how would they shape present-day academic ethics and teaching responsibilities?

Satya (Truth): Our scholarship and classroom narratives must be rooted in intellectual honesty, not convenience or populism.

Niti (Ethical Rectitude): We must model ethical behavior academic integrity, humility in knowledge, and fairness in evaluation.

Upaya (Methodical Instruction): Teaching should be contextual and compassionate. Dharmaśāstra doesn’t just focus on rules it considers time, place, and person. Legal education must follow the same spirit.

Your Ph.D. explored systemic delays in the judiciary. With the advent of AI, virtual hearings, and e-courts, do you believe we’re truly addressing the root causes—or merely digitizing the same old cracks?

A digital interface on a broken foundation still cracks. While AI and e-courts reduce surface delays like hearing backlogs or document access but they don’t always address deeper issues like procedural complexity, poor legal aid infrastructure, or judge-to-case ratio due to huge pendency of cases and therefore the judiciary is overburden. Again it is difficult to answer whether AI and e-courts alone can address judicial delay.

With the Supreme Court revisiting issues like same-sex marriage and reproductive rights, how do you view classical Hindu law interacting with these evolving constitutional ideals? Are we witnessing convergence, or quiet resistance?

It’s a quiet tension. Classical Hindu law, especially its two schools Mitakshara & Dayabhaga roots, values duty and order; modern constitutional law values dignity and autonomy.

Yet, there’s convergence in spirit both seek dharma. For instance, judicial interpretations have tried harmonizing both, like in Navtej Singh Johar, where morality was reinterpreted in light of constitutional ethics. The resistance is not from the texts, but often from social actors misusing them.

Finally what advice would you give to a 1^st year student who enters lawchool  feeling lost  as many of us once did?

Feeling lost is not a sign of weakness, it’s a sign that you have stepped into something new, something vast, and something meaningful. When you walk into law school for the first time, it may feel like standing at the foot of a mountain. The mountain is big, you feel small, and the climb looks uncertain.

But let me tell you something, even the most accomplished lawyers, judges, and professors once stood where you are now, unsure of their path. The difference? They chose not to let confusion paralyze them. They chose to walk, one step at a time.

In life and in law clarity often comes not before action, but through action. So don’t wait to feel certain before you begin. Start reading, start asking questions, start attending classes with an open heart and an alert mind. In due time, the fog will lift.

And remember, your worth is not measured by how much you know on Day One. It’s measured by how deeply you grow every day after that.

Also, don’t just aim to become a successful lawyer aim to become a thoughtful, ethical, and compassionate human being, because law without empathy is mere mechanics. Be patient with yourself. Ask for help. Breathe. And always remind yourself: You are not lost. You are just exploring.

Disclaimer: Interviews published on Lawctopus are not edited thoroughly so as to retain the voice of the interviewee.

This interview is a part of our Star Interview series, conducted by the Campus Leaders at Lawctopus. Stay tuned for more!