2023 Supreme(SC) 745
D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J. B. PARDIWALA
Ajay Shankar Srivastava – Appellant
Versus
Bar Council of India – Respondent
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Anand Nandan, Adv., Mr. Amit Pawan, AOR, Mr. Dhruv Shankar Misra, Adv., Mr. Mohd Faiz, Adv., Mr. Zubair, Adv., Mr. Aakarsh, Adv., Ms. Shubhangi, Adv., Mr. Akshat Srivastava, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, Sr. Adv., Mr. Apurba Kumar Sharma, Sr. Adv., Ms. Radhika Gautam, AOR, Ms. Anjul Divedi, Adv.
Judgement Key Points
- The petitioner, a practicing advocate, challenged a Bar Council of India office order dated 1 November 2022 directing State Bar Councils to halt verification processes and the method for co-opting members to fill casual vacancies in State Bar Councils. (!)
- In 2015, the Bar Council of India notified rules for verification of advocates' certificates and place of practice, leading to commencement of the process by State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India. (!)
- Challenges to the 2015 verification rules in various High Courts were transferred to the Supreme Court. (!)
- A prior High Powered Committee was formed by the Bar Council of India to monitor verification, but issues arose due to universities demanding fees, addressed by a Supreme Court direction on 1 March 2017 prohibiting such charges. (!) (!)
- Out of approximately 20.57 lakh enrolled advocates, only about 9.22 lakh verification forms or declarations were received, with many State Bar Councils showing low submission rates. (!) (!) (!)
- Unsubmitted forms raise concerns about unqualified individuals or those with fake degrees entering court practice, potentially disrupting judicial work, necessitating their identification and removal. (!)
- Verification of enrolled advocates' educational degrees and enrollment certificates is essential to maintain the integrity of the administration of justice, as fake qualifications pose a grave threat. (!)
- The 1 November 2022 office order criticized hasty issuance of practice certificates by the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council without proper degree verification but allowed ongoing proper verifications to continue; it was not intended to stop verification entirely. (!) (!)
- The Supreme Court directed constitution of a new High Powered Committee, chaired by a former Supreme Court Judge, with specified members including former High Court Judges, senior advocates, and Bar Council of India nominees, to monitor verification. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
- The Committee is empowered to issue guidelines and directions for verifying both educational degrees and enrollment certificates, with State Bar Councils required to comply and report. (!)
- Universities and examination boards must verify certificates without fees and without delay. (!)
- The Committee shall convene promptly, submit a status report by 31 August 2023, and the matter listed on 11 September 2023. (!) (!)
- The order does not extend existing terms of Bar Councils. (!)
JUDGMENT :
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI.
1. The petitioner, who is a practising advocate, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court to seek two distinct reliefs. The first of them is for challenging an office order dated 1 November 2022 of the Bar Council of India to all the State Bar Councils, the purport of which (according to the petitioner) was to interdict the process of verification of advocates who are enrolled with the State Bar Councils for scrutinizing the genuineness of their degrees and enrollments. The second issue deals with the method of co-opting members of the State Bar Councils to fill up casual vacancies.
2. We have heard Mr. Anand Nandan, counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the Bar Council of India with Mr. Apurba Kumar Sharma.
3. In 2015, the Bar Council of India notified the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules 2015,1[“2015 Rules”]. The process of verification of the certificates and place of practice commenced with efforts by the State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India.
4. The 2015 Rules were challenged before several High Courts, includin
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
