Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD
M. NAGAPRASANNA
Ravichandragouda R. Patil – Appellant
Versus
Karnataka State Bar Council – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks refund based on illegality of excess fees. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court references precedent highlighting limits on fee collection. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's findings stress compliance with statutory limits on fees. (Para 6 , 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
1. The petitioner in-person is before this Court seeking the following prayer:
ii. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction quashing the impugned notification/notice issued by the KSBC under office Nos.080-22868712/080-22868561 (Annexure-A) prescribing a sum of Rs.6800/- under the head “other fees” and other purported mandatory fees for enrolment; and further declare that the current system of collecting fees beyond the statutory enrolment fee under section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act , 1961 is ultra vires, illegal, and unconstitutional;
iv. Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, restraining the respondents from denying the petitioner any benefit, facility, or service otherwise available to other advocates solely on the ground that the petitioner has sought refund of excess enrolment fee;
vi. Pass such other or further orders or directions as this H
The charging of enrolment fees exceeding statutory limits is impermissible and violates fundamental rights under the Constitution.
Fees charged in excess of the statutory enrolment fee under the Advocates Act, 1961, are impermissible and unconstitutional.
(1) Enrolment as Advocate – Quantum of enrolment fees – According to legislative scheme of Advocates Act, Bar Councils must only charge amount stipulated under Section 24(1)(f) as an enrolment fee – ....
State Bar Councils cannot charge enrollment fees beyond the limits set by law, and such decisions have prospective effect without requiring refunds of previously collected excess fees.
The court affirmed the statutory enrollment fee limit set by the Advocates Act, ordering the refund of excess fees collected.
The abrupt increase of the nomination fee for elections to Rs.1,25,000 without following due legal process violates democratic principles and is deemed arbitrary and unconstitutional.
Point of law: The right to establish an educational institution can be regulated; but such regulatory measures must, in general, be to ensure the maintenance of proper academic standards, atmosphere ....
(1) Bar Examination and pre-enrolment training – Bar Examination and pre-enrolment training – Quality of lawyers is an important aspect and part of administration of justice and access to justice – H....
The impugned Government order was illegal and arbitrary as it was issued in exercise of power under Section 7 of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitati....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
