The Bar Council of India has the power to prescribe minimum qualifications for admission to a course of degree in law in any recognized University under section 49(1)(af) of the Advocates Act, 1961.

Headnote:
RULE 5 OF PART IV OF THE RULES OF BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA - STANDARDS OF LEGAL EDUCATION AND RECOGNITION OF DEGREES IN LAW - MINIMUM QUALIFYING MARKS FOR ADMISSION TO NEW FIVE-YEAR LAW COURSE - VALIDITY - CHALLENGE - RULE HELD VALID - ADMISSIONS OF STUDENTS WHO DID NOT SECURE MINIMUM QUALIFYING MARKS - CANCELLATION - HARDSHIP CAUSED TO STUDENTS - STUDENTS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE THEIR EDUCATION.
Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, students who did not secure the minimum qualifying marks prescribed by Rule 5 of Part IV of the Rules of Bar Council of India for admission to the new five-year law course, challenged the validity of the rule and sought to prevent the cancellation of their provisional admissions. The rule required students to obtain 45% marks in the qualifying examination, with a relaxation of 5% for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes candidates.
Finding of the Court:

The court upheld the validity of Rule 5, holding that the Bar Council of India had the power to prescribe minimum qualifications for admission to a course of degree in law in any recognized University under section 49(1)(af) of the Advocates Act, 1961. The court found that the rule was not arbitrary and had a rational nexus to the purpose of improving the standard of legal education.
Issues: 1. Whether Rule 5 of Part IV of the Rules of Bar Council of India, prescribing minimum qualifying marks for admission to the new five-year law course, was ultra vires the powers of the Bar Council of India. 2. Whether the cancellation of the provisional admissions of students who did not secure the minimum qualifying marks was justified.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that Rule 5 was not ultra vires the powers of the Bar Council of India because: a) Section 7(1)(h) and (i), 24(1)(c)(iii) and (iiia), and 49(1)(af), (ag), and (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, empowered the Bar Council of India to frame rules for the standards of legal education and recognition of degrees in law. b) Clause (af) of sub-section (1) of section 49 specifically authorized the Bar Council of India to prescribe minimum qualifications required for admission to a course of degree in law in any recognized University. 2. The court found that the cancellation of the provisional admissions of students who did not secure the minimum qualifying marks was justified because: a) The college had granted provisional admissions to the students despite the clear mandate of the Bar Council of India and the University. b) The students were informed at the time of admission that their admissions were provisional and subject to the relaxation of the qualifying marks by the Bar Council of India.
Final Decision: The court rejected the challenge to the validity of Rule 5 but directed the respondents to allow the petitioners and other similarly situated students to continue their education for the new five-year law course as if they were validly admitted.

JUDGMENT - M.S. JAMDAR, J.:---The challenge in this writ petition is to Rule 5 of Part IV of the Rules of Bar Council of India in respect of the Standards of Legal Education Recognition of Degrees in Law.

2. Upto academic year 1981-82 as per Rule 1 of part IV of the then existing Bar Council of India Rules, relating to the standards of legal education and recognition of degrees in law, for admission as an Advocate a degree in law obtained from any University in the territory of India after 12th day of March, 1967 was recognised for the purpose of section 24(1)(c)(iii) of the Advocate's Act, 1961, provided that at the time of joining the course of instruction in law for a degree in law, the candidate was a graduate of University or possessed such academic qualification which was considered equivalent to a graduate's degree of a University by the Bar Council of India and that the law degree was obtained after undergoing a course of study in law for a minimum period of three years as provided in the rules. However, in exercise of the powers conferred by section 49 read with section 7(h) and (i), 24(1)(c)(iii) and (iii)(a) of the Advocates Act, 1961, (hereinafter called the 'said Act'), the Bar Council of India decided to change the pattern of legal education in the country and formulated a new law course which contemplates that at the time of joining the course of instructions in law for a degree in law the person concerned has passed an examination in 10+2 Course of schooling recognised by the educational authority of the Central or the State Governments or possesses such academic qualifications which are considered equivalent to such 10+2 courses by the Bar Council of India, and the law degree has been obtained after undergoing a regular course of study in a duly recognised law college under said rules for a minimum period of five years, out of which the first two years shall be devoted to study of pre-law courses as necessary qualification for admission to three years course of study in law to be commenced thereafter. A resolution adopting new pattern of legal education was considered in a meeting of the Bar Council of India held on 17th/18th April, 1982 and was passed in a meeting held on 6th/7th May, 1982. Consequently, the Bar Council of India Rules regarding the standards of legal education and recognition of degrees in law for admission as Advocate were amended and rules contained in Part IV were replaced by a new set of rules, which into force from 1-6-1982.

3. At this stage we would like to quote the Preamble of the new Rules in Part IV, formulated by the Bar Council of India, because the purpose stated in the preamble has some relevance while considering the challenge in this writ petition :---

"Preamble of the Rules of the Bar Council of India in Part IV :--- Whereas there is almost complete unanimity of opinion in the country that Legal Education needs to be drastically altered and improved ;

And whereas piecemeal changes introduced from time to time have not brought about any significant raising of standards and improvement in the quality of new entrants to the Bar ;

And whereas it is the statutory obligation of the Bar Council of India to promote legal Education and to lay down standards of such education for purposes of admission to the Bar.

And whereas the Legal Education Committee of the Bar Council of India has examined the problem in great depth in consultation with the Universities and State Bar Councils and made its proposals.

And whereas the Bar Council of India has considered the implications and merits of the said proposals.

And whereas it is now recognised the world over that apart from technical knowledge of law a liberal education involving exposure to other disciplines and fields of knowledge in particular the humanities is essential to enable a lawyer to make a useful contribution to social change and development.

This Council in exercise of its powers under sections 7(h) and (i), 24 and 49(1) of the Advoca

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis