Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Supreme Court Holds Unrecognized Law College Graduates Ineligible for Enrollment as Advocates

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Date: June 9, 2023

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India held that graduates from unapproved law colleges are ineligible for enrollment as advocates. The judgment was delivered by Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Vikram Nath, who stated that the Bar Council of India (BCI) has the authority to prescribe enrollment norms.

The case, titled Bar Council of India vs. Rabi Sahu & Anr., arose from an appeal filed by the BCI against an order of the Orissa High Court directing the enrollment of a writ petitioner as an advocate. The Supreme Court had stayed the operation of the high court order during the appeal process.

Justice Sanjay Kumar, while delivering the judgment, observed, "The rule framed by BCI requiring a candidate for enrollment as an Advocate to have completed his law course from a college recognized/approved by BCI cannot be said to be invalid." The court emphasized that the BCI's role in the enrollment process cannot be undermined, contrary to the previous judgment in V. Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India.

The writ petitioner had obtained a law degree from Vivekananda Law College, Angul, which was not recognized or approved by the BCI. The BCI had previously issued directives to the college, explicitly stating that students admitted there would not be eligible for enrollment as advocates. Consequently, the Orissa State Bar Council rejected the writ petitioner's application for enrollment.

The Division Bench of the Orissa High Court had allowed the writ petition, relying on the now-invalidated judgment in V. Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India. However, a recent Constitution Bench judgment in Bar Council of India vs. Bonnie Foi Law College & Ors. clarified that the BCI has the power to determine the norms for enrollment.

In its ruling, the Supreme Court emphasized, "We have no hesitation in holding that the Division Bench was not justified in directing the enrollment of respondent No. 1 as an Advocate, despite the fact that he secured his law degree from a college which was not recognized or approved by BCI." The appeal was allowed, setting aside the order of the Orissa High Court.

This judgment highlights the importance of obtaining a law degree from a BCI-recognized or approved college for individuals aspiring to practice as advocates. It reinforces the role of the BCI in determining the eligibility criteria for enrollment, ensuring the maintenance of standards within the legal profession.

Date of Decision: June 9, 2023

BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA  vs RABI SAHU & ANR.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/9-June-23-BCI-vs-Rabi-Sahu.pdf"]

Latest Legal News