The High Court has the power to refuse admission to any person at its discretion and this power is not unconstitutional.

Ramaswami, J.

1. In this case the petitioner Babul Chandra Mitra has asked for a rule calling upon the High Court on the administrative side to show cause why a writ or direction under Article 228 of the Constitution should not be issued commanding that the petitioner should be enrolled as an Advocate.

2. The application is founded upon the following facts. Babul Chandra Mitra obtained the degree of Bachelor of Law from Patna University in the year 1937. Next year he applied for being enrolled as a Pleader to practise at Mozaffarpore. The application was rejected by the High Court. In 1939 and again in 1943 the applicant asked for reconsideration of his case. But the High Court considered that there was no reason to alter the previous decision and that the enrolment was properly refused. In 1945 the applicant joined the chambers of the late Srinarain Bose, Advocate, and pursued studies for a period of one year. On 9th October 1950 he applied to the High Court for being enrolled as an Advocate and attached to his application three certificates of good conduct. On 8th January 1951 the application was rejected by the High Court without giving notice of the application to the Bar Council. The petitioner contends that in making this order the High Court has acted contrary to law and that the fundamental right of the petitioner to practice a profession has been violated.

3. In this proceeding the validity of the order of the High Court is challenged on the grounds : (1) that the application for enrolment could not lawfully be rejected without making a reference to the Bar Council under Rule 9 of the Bar Council Rules; (2) that in any case the proviso to Section 9 (1) of the Bar Councils Act was constitutionally invalid since the High Court was granted power to refuse admission to any person in its unfettered discretion and so violated the guarantee under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution.

4. The preliminary question which arises is whether in the present case this Bench has jurisdiction to issue a writ or order to the High Court on its administrative side.

5. In the approach to this question it is necessary to consider the relevant provisions of the Indian Bar Councils Act and Letters Patent of the Patna High Court. Under Section 8 of the Indian Bar Councils Act no person shall be entitled as of right to practise in any High Court, unless his name is entered in the roll of the Advocates of the High Court maintained under the Act. Section 8 (2) requires that the High Court shall prepare and maintain a roll of Advocates of the High Court in which shall be entered the names of ..... (b) all .....persons who have been admitted to be Advocates of the High Court under this Act. Under Section 9 the Bar Council may, with the previous sanction of the High Court, make rules to regulate the admission of persons to be Advocates of the High Court. But there is an important proviso that such rules shall not limit or in any way affect the power of the High Court to refuse admission to any person at its discretion. Clause (7) of the Letters Patent is also material in this context : "And we do -hereby authorise and empower the High Court of Judicature at Patna to approve, admit and enrol such and so many Advocates, Vakils and Attorneys, as to the said High Court may seem meet, and such Advocates, Vakils and Attorneys shall be and are hereby authorised to appear for the suitors of the said High Court, and to plead or to act, or to plead and act, for the said suitors, according as the said High Court, may by its rules and directions determine, and subject to such rules and directions."

6. The question at issue is whether this Bench has jurisdiction in the present case to issue a writ or direction to the High Court in its performance of functions under the Ear Councils Act or under the Letters Patent. It was argued by Mr. B. C. Ghosh on behalf of the petitioner that Article 226 of the Constitution is couched in wide terms and the High Cour