IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Nishant Khatri - Appellant
Versus
Bar Council of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 16623 of 2022 & CM Appl. 52326 of 2022
Decided On : 05-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's concerns over non-conduct of aibe. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. supreme court directive on aibe conduct. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 3. understanding aibe requirements and situation. (Para 7 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. court's analysis of aibe rules. (Para 9 , 11) |
| 5. directions regarding aibe for advocates. (Para 13) |
| 6. next hearing scheduled. (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner - Nishat Khatri seeks directions against the Respondent No.1 - Bar Council of India (hereinafter, `BCI') in view of the non-conduct of the All India Bar Examination (`AIBE'). The Petitioner's concern is that he ought not to be debarred from practising as an advocate due to the non-conduct of the AIBE.
3. It is submitted by the Petitioner that in terms of Rules 9 and 10 of the All India Bar Examination Rules, 2010 (hereinafter, `AIBE Rules, 2010') the AIBE was introduced by the BCI on 5th June, 2010. The said exam is mandatory as per Rule 9 of the AIBE Rules, 2010, which provide that no advocate can practice under Chapter VI of the Advocates Act, 1961 without clearing the AIBE. Further, the AIBE is to be cleared by an advocate who is provisionally enrolled within a period of two years from the date of provisional enrolment.
4. The Petitioner points out that in the minutes of the meeting dated 9th August, 2020, a resolution was passed by the of BCI giving exemption from the said Rule 9 the AIBE Rules, 2010 from 24th March, 2020 to 31st March, 2021 due to the outbreak of the pandemic. Further, the last AIBE was conducted only in October, 2021 and no exam has been conducted since then.
5. In Civil Appeal No(s). 816-817 titled Bar Council of India v. Twinkle Rahul Mangaonkar & Ors. the Supreme Court while dealing with certain issues concerning the AIBE passed order dated 2nd August, 2022 wherein it clearly records that the BCI had made a statement that the syllabus would be published within 15 days from the said date and the examination would be held within a period of about three months thereafter. The said statement was taken on record. The extract of the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is set out below:
"With reference to the averments in the application(s), on our query, learned senior counsel appearing for the Bar Council of India states that the syllabus will be published within 15 days from today and the examination will be held within a period of about three months thereafter. The statement is taken on record."
6. The case of the Petitioner is that he got provisionally enrolled with the Respondent No.2 - Bar Council of Delhi on 19th November, 2019. He admits that he did not appeared in the exam held on 31st October, 2021, as in accordance with the AIBE Rules, 2010, he had four attempts in two years in which he could clear the AIBE. However, since the exam had not been conducted, he could not exercise his choice of attempting the AIBE.
7. On a query from the Court, Mr. Preetpal Singh, ld. Counsel appearing for the BCI admits that the last exam was conducted on 31st October, 2021. However, due to a change in the agency conducting the AIBE, there has been a delay in conducting the same. He further submits that in terms of the order of the Supreme Court, the syllabus of the AIBE has already been published and the notification regarding the same is likely to be issued shortly.
8. On a query by the Court, as to what would be the position of advocates who are unable to take the AIBE within two years due the non-conduct of the examination and whether they would be entitled to practice as advocates, Mr. Preet Pal Singh, ld. Counsel submits that he would like to seek instructions to this effect.
9. The Court has considered AIBE Rules, especially Rules 9 and 10. The same are extracted hereinbelow:
"9. No advocate enrolled under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961 shall be entitled to practise under Chapter IV of the Advocates Act, 1961, unless such advocate success
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for advocates to clear the AIBE before being entitled to practice, and the need to balance the rights of advocates with the doctrin....
The main legal principle established is that LLB graduates in employment should be given the flexibility to appear in the All India Bar Examination and decide on employment after passing the exam, in....
(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....
Proof of residence for enrolment in Bar Council of Delhi is justified under the Advocates Act to maintain jurisdiction and order within the legal profession.
The court emphasized the need for transparency and convenience in the enrolment process, while upholding the requirement of proof of residence as necessary for maintaining discipline and regulatory c....
Enrolment as Advocate – Rule framed by BCI requiring a candidate for enrolment as an Advocate to have completed his law course from a college recognized/ approved by BCI cannot be said to be invalid.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.