According to the petitioner, the charge of exorbitant fees effectively denies the facility of enrolment to young aspiring lawyers who do not have the requisite financial resources.
—
THE Supreme Court on Monday issued notice to the Union government, the Bar Council of India (BCI), and all the state Bar councils on a petition flagging the issue of exorbitant fees being charged by various state Bar councils for enrolment as an advocate.
A three-judge Bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala termed the issue ‘significant’. The bench was hearing a petition filed by one Gaurav Kumar.
The issue of exorbitant fees being charged by various State Bar Councils for enrolment as an advocate comes under the scanner of the Supreme Court as it issues notice to the Centre, BCI&others on a plea alleging that it denies the facility of enrollment to young aspiring lawyers. pic.twitter.com/PTycQYnbJd
— The Leaflet (@TheLeaflet_in) April 10, 2023
Kumar contended that the enrolment fees being charged by the various state Bar councils is in violation of Section 24(1) (persons who may be admitted as advocates on a state roll), which stipulates eligibility conditions for being enrolled as an advocate. The conditions, among others, include that the person must be a citizen of India; must have completed the age of 21 years, and have obtained a degree in law.
According to Kumar, the BCI ought to have stepped in to ensure that exorbitant enrolment fee is not charged. He submitted before the court that enrolment fees in Odisha is ₹42,100; in Gujarat, ₹25,000; in Uttarakhand, ₹23,650; in Jharkhand, ₹21,460; in Kerala,₹20,050. Such exorbitant fees, according to Kumar, effectively denies the facility of enrolment to young aspiring lawyers who do not have the requisite financial resources.
In February, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, while upholding the validity of the All India Bar Examination, had flagged the issue of different state Bar councils charging different fees for enrolment. The Bench had opined that it needed the attention of the BCI, which was not devoid of the powers to ensure that a uniform pattern is observed. The Bench had cautioned that “the fee [should] not become oppressive at the threshold of young students joining the BarASE”
