Madras High Court Asks BCI To Process Additional Intake Application Of Private Law College, Says Ban On New Intake Cannot Be Without Data

The Madras High Court has directed the Bar Council of India to process applications filed by nine private law colleges seeking permission for additional intake starting from the academic year 2025-2026. On the BCI's claim that there was no requirement for new Law Colleges in some areas, the bench of Justice R Suresh Kumar and Justice Shamim Ahmed noted that such a drastic decision could not be taken regarding the arena of need-know basis, in the absence of any data for judicial scrutiny. “If such a decision is taken by the BCI to put a ban on CLEs to be established hereinafter on the basis of such data, where, on need-basis, there is no further need to establish any new Institution, additional intake or additional course, such a drastic decision could be taken by the BCI supported by data and in the absence of any such data being filed before this Court for judicial scrutiny, we do not wish to comment on the decision taken by the BCI on the arena of need-basis ,” the court said. The court was hearing petitions filed by nine private law colleges regarding approval from BCI for additional intake of students for the 3-year LLB and 5-year BA. LLB courses. With respect to seven out of these nine colleges, the processing fee was returned. In case of remaining two colleges, the applications were kept pending. Thus, the colleges approached the court seeking direction to the BCI to pass appropriate orders. The Standing Counsel for the BCI initially informed that the BCI had decided to place a moratorium of 3 years by which no new Law colleges were to be established or granted approval anywhere in India. It was informed that as per the decision, the universities, state government, central government entities and other institutions were not to submit or forward proposals or applications to the BCI for establishing new colleges. However, an exception was carved out for institutions that were to be established for students exclusively belonging to backward classes. The counsel informed the court that the decision was taken to elevate and protect the standards of legal education, preserving the dignity of the legal profession and reinforcing public trust in the justice system, while ensuring inclusivity in keeping with constitutional mandate. However, in a later hearing, the counsel informed that a new policy decision had been taken as per which, whenever such applications were filed and were pending with the BCI, a decision would be taken after conducting an inspection by the Inspection Permission Team consisting of a former judge of the High Court and a law professor in each State. It was submitted that after conducting inspection based on the infrastructure of the institution and a need-basis, the application would be processed and a final decision would be taken and communicated to the Institutions concerned. The court noted that since the petitioners in the present case were all exisiting law colleges who were seeking permission for additional intake, the moratorium or need-basis decision would not be applicable for them and thus there was no impediment for the BCI to process the applications and take decision. The court added that when applications were filed, the BCI was to verify whether necessary infrastructural and institutional facilities were available, and upon verification take a decision on approval. The court observed that such a decision could be taken only after considering the merit of application of each institution and no uniform decision could be taken in this regard. Though the BCI orally argued that as per available data, there was no requirement for any new law colleges or additional intake, the court noted that no such data had been presented before it. Thus, the court directed that the colleges could resubmit their applications which should be processed by the BCI within 3 weeks and a decision was to be taken on merits. Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. Dakshayani Reddy Senior Counsel for Mr. M. Ravi Counsel for Respondent: Mr. A. Selvendran, Special Government Pleader, Mr. S. R. Raghunathan Standing Counsel, Mr. S. Siva Shanmugam, Standing Counsel Case Title: KMC College of Law v. State of Tamil Nadu and Others Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 75 Case No: W.P.Nos.48845, 48849, 48870, 48874, 48880, 48893, 48906, 48907 and 48911 of 2025Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment

Madras High Court Asks BCI To Process Additional Intake Application Of Private Law College, Says Ban On New Intake Cannot Be Without Data

Upasana Sajeev

Tags