Can BCI Refuse To Enrol Graduate From Law College Which Was De-Recognized? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment

The Supreme Court on Wednesday reserved its judgement in a plea which dealt which the question whether the Bar Council of India (BCI) has the power to regulate matters pertaining to education or not before enrolment as an advocate. “Despite service of notice, no one has appeared on behalf of the Respondents. We have heard the Advocate for the Petitioners. Judgement reserved”, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sanjay Kumar ordered. During the brief hearing today, Advocate on Record Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, appearing for the BCI, informed the Bench that in a Constitution Bench judgement which dealt with All India Bar Exam, the Court had held that there are wide powers for the BCI which can be exercised not only post enrolment but pre-enrolment as well. “Where is the Respondent?”, the Bench queried. The Advocate, in response, said that the question didn't involve an individual but was primarily on the ambit of BCI's powers. “Your Lordships has stayed the impugned judgement (in 2013)”, he added. The Top Court had stayed the Orissa High Court’s judgment restraining the BCI from imposing any condition for enrolment as an advocate, including the one that a law student must have graduated only from a recognised law college.As per the case, the respondent Rabi Sahu, had obtained a law degree from a law college whose affiliation was cancelled by the BCI. When he wanted to enrol as an advocate, he was unable to do so. Aggrieved, he moved the High court which held that the BCI could not frame any rules and add any conditions for enrolment in addition to what was prescribed under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961. When the matter reached the Court, several arguments were made. It was stated that the recognition granted by BCI is after it is satisfied that the institution has all the facilities for imparting proper legal education. For this, BCI’s inspection is imperative, the Court was told. All these steps were taken by the BCI to ensure quality of the legal education through the five-year courses. Further, it was argued that BCI had derecognized 48 colleges and if the impugned judgement was left as is, then the other colleges would claim parity, by seeking affiliation. After hearing the submissions, the Court was inclined to stay the impugned judgement then. The matter was admitted by the Court in 2013. Case Title: Bar Council of India vs Rabi Sahu

Can BCI Refuse To Enrol Graduate From Law College Which Was De-Recognized? Supreme Court Reserves Judgment

Rintu Mariam Biju

Tags