The Madhya Pradesh High Court has directed the State Bar Council, along with the State Bar Association and the Advocates' Bar Association, to frame guidelines prescribing a minimum stipend for junior advocates within 6 months. [2026 LiveLaw (MP) 391]

The direction came after the court was informed that Mr Ayush Mishra, a junior counsel in the matter was not being paid any stipend. The bench of Justice Vishal Mishra observed,

"Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council in consultation with M.P. High Court Bar Association and M.P. High Court Advocates' Bar Association should lay down a guideline for minimum stipend to be paid to junior advocates for a period of three years in urban and rural areas". 

The court noted that the Bar Council of India, through its circular of October 15, 2024, had specifically directed State Bar Councils to ensure payment of minimum stipend to junior advocates for at least three years from the date of engagement. Per the BCI circular, the minimum stipend is ₹20,000 per month for junior advocates in urban areas and ₹15,000 per month in rural areas. 

The court, however, noted that the circular was only recommendatory in nature. Therefore passed the aforementioned directions. The court also emphasized,

"State Bar Council being regulatory body is having heavy burden to see that junior advocates are paid stipend for maintaining their expenses and transportation". 

The court further directed the State Bar Council to inquire why the junior advocate in the present matter was not getting a stipend from his senior advocates. 

The bench further highlighted,

"Madhya Pradesh State Bar Council, Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association and Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates' Bar Association are directed to take note of the aforesaid fact and see to it that all junior advocates are paid stipend for doing the work of their senior counsel so that they can bear their day to day expenses for learning in initial phases of their practice, when they do not have their own work". 

The court adjourned this primary matter for final hearing, noting that the arguing counsel was adjusted for. 

Case Title: Vipin Pandey v Rani Durgavati University, WP-7749-2005

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (MP) 391

For Petitioner: Advocate Ayushi Mishra

For Respondent: Advocate Divy Krishna Bilaiya

Click here to read/download the Order