The judgment establishes that the right to appear before a sales tax authority under the Bombay Sales Tax Act does not amount to entitlement to practise the profession of law as contemplated by the Advocates Act, emphasizing the distinction between legal practitioners and sales tax practitioners.

1. The appellant claims that he was a Sales Tax Practitioner in 1949 when the Central Provinces and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947, was in force in the State of Madhya Pradesh and, thereafter, he continued his practice in sales tax matters at Nagpur under the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. The appellant claimed that when the Advocates Act, 1961, came into force, he was entitled to be enrolled as an advocate by the Bar Council of Maharashtra.

2. It has been contended by Mr. Ganpule appearing on behalf of the appellant, that the appellant was entitled to be enrolled as an advocate by virtue of the provisions of sub-s.(3)(aa) of S.24 of the Advocates Act, 1961. There is no dispute that he does not have a degree in law or for that matter any degree, but he is a person who was entitled to practise the profession of law before 1st December, 1961 by virtue of the provisions of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959. Therefore, his right to be enrolled as an advocate could not be denied.

3. We shall have to examine whether the appellant's case comes within the provisions of sub-s.(3)(aa) of S.24 of the Advocates Act to justify the claim made by Mr. Ganpule. Sub-s.(1) of S.24 lays down the qualifications which must be acquired by a person who wants to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll. Sub-s.(2) provides that notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s.(1) a vakil or a pleader who is a law graduate may be admitted as an advocate under certain circumstances. Sub-s.(3) deals with cases of persons who do not fall either under sub-s.(1) or (2). Sub-s.(3) of S.24 is as under.:

"24(3). Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-s.(1), a person who

(a) has, for at least three years, been vakil or a pleader or a mukhtar, or was entitled at any time to be enrolled under any law as an advocate of a High Court (including a High Court of a former Part B State) or of a Court of Judicial Commissioner in any Union Territory; or

(aa) before the 1st day of December, 1961, was entitled otherwise than as an advocate to practise the profession of law (whether by way of pleading or acting or both) by virtue of the provisions of any law, or who would have been so entitled had he not been in public service on the said date; or

(b)

(c)

4. Since the appellant's claim is confined to clause (aa) of sub-s.(3), it will have to be examined whether he was entitled "to practise the profession of law" by virtue of the provisions of any law before 1st day of December, 1961. The appellant's case that he was appearing in sales tax matters before sales tax authorities under the Bombay Sales Tax Act has not been disputed. But that does not mean he was practising the profession of law. S.71 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, empowers not only legal practitioners but many other persons to appear before a sales tax authority. S.71 provides:

71. Appearance before any authority in proceedings.- (1) Any person, who is entitled or required to attend before any authority in connection with any proceeding under this Act, may attend -

(a) by a relative or a person regularly employed by him, or

(b) by legal practitioner or Chartered Accountant or Cost Accountant, who is not disqualified by or under sub-s.(2), or

(c) by a sales tax practitioner who possesses the prescribed qualifications and is entered in the list which the Commissioner shall maintain in that behalf, and who is not disqualified by or under sub-s.(2), if such relative, person employed, legal practitioner, Chartered Accountant, Cost Accountant or sales tax practitioner is authorised by such person in the prescribed form, and such authorisation may include the authority to act on behalf of such person in such proceedings.

(2) The Commissioner may by order in writing and for reasons to be recorded therein disqualify for such period as is stated in the order from attending before any such authority, any legal practitioner, Chartered Accountant, Cost Accountant or sales tax practitioner, -

(i) who has been remove