BCI Examining Proposal That Senior Advocates Should Compulsorily Induct 5 Newly Enrolled Advocates

On the recommendation of the Supreme Court to revisit the present mechanism of induction into the legal profession, to improve the quality of professionals joining the Bar, the Bar Council of India ("BCI") had submitted an affidavit indicating the changes it seeks to implement to achieve the same. On 15.03.2022, a Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh had made suggestions pertaining to the quality of legal education; shortcomings of the Bar Examination; developing a system for juniors to find placement in chambers. Senior Advocate, Mr. S.N. Bhat appearing on behalf of BCI had sought time to take instructions and file an affidavit in this regard. The affidavit was filed by BCI through Advocate-on-Record Durga Dutt in a plea challenging the judgment of the Gujarat High Court, which allowed persons with other employment, whether full time or part time to enrol as Advocates, without resigning from their jobs. Enrolment for candidates pursuing employment During the course of the hearing on 25.01.2022, the Amicus Curiae, Senior Advocate, Mr. K.V. Viswanathan suggested that the candidates with a job can be issued a roll number to take the examination, but they can seek enrolment only thereafter. "…Your lordship might think of a mechanism where they are not enrolled and given a certificate, but put on a register that qualifies them to write the exam and thereafter give them enrolment.He also suggested that prior to enrolment, such candidates are to undergo a rigorous viva examination. Considering the fundamental right to practice a profession, the Bench felt that there was a need to balance the requirement of the Bar Council that candidates resign from their current employment while seeking enrolment as Advocate even before taking the Bar Examination. In its affidavit, BCI submitted that the same is under consideration. However, it pointed out that making the All India Bar Examination, a pre-enrolment examination, would be in the teeth of the judgment in V Sudeer v. Bar Council of India, wherein the Apex Court held that a law degree from a recognised University along with fulfilment of other statutory stipulations as enumerated in the Advocate Act and State Bar Council and BCI rules were adequate for the purposes of enrolment and no other pre-qualification could be imposed. There exists a High Power Monitoring Committee to oversee AIBE It was asserted that there already exists a High Power Monitoring Committee chaired by a former Supreme Court Judge to oversee AIBE and efforts are being undertaken to make the screening process more stringent to improve the quality of lawyers entering the legal profession. BCI highlighted that for AIBE 16 held in 2021 only bare acts without comments were permitted and in the future it would enforce tougher testing parameters. There is another High Level Committee comprising Senior Advocate and former judges of the Supreme Court/High Courts to look into the issues. Placement of newly enrolled Advocates The BCI is to constitute a High Power Committee to check the validity of compulsory chamber placement with senior Advocates or Advocates having 25 years of standing at the Bar for young law graduates or to devise a fair system for juniors to find placement in chambers. Once approved, the BCI would request these Advocates to engage at least 5 such juniors in their chambers. BCI also intends to frame Rules whereby the young lawyers would be required to take an online objective test. On the basis of the result of such test, the meritorious junior law graduates would be placed in the chambers of Senior Advocates or Advocates having 25 years of standing at the Bar. Other graduates will get placed under Advocates having 15-20 years of experience. State Level Entrance Test for admission to law colleges BCI also expressed that it was eager to explore a system wherein the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India and Advocacy Board would introduce a State Level Entrance Test for admission to Law Colleges. It assured that the concerned authorities would take up the issue in its next meeting. About 500 Institutions earmarked as sub-standard The BCI stated that about 500 Institutions have been identified as sub-standard and a team of former Judges, Senior Advocates and noted academicians plan to conduct surprise visits. In case these Institutions are found to have inadequate facilities or infrastructure, then steps would be taken to withdraw the approval granted for running courses of Legal Education to such Universities. Difficulties faced by BCI as a regulatory body The difficulties faced by BCI in regulating Legal Education was enumerated as under - Implementation of the rules made by BCI lies with the Universities;Improvement in the LL.M. Degree required to improve quality of faculties;Degree is granted by the University and the...

BCI Examining Proposal That Senior Advocates Should Compulsorily Induct 5 Newly Enrolled Advocates

Sohini Chowdhury

Tags