Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Vanshaj Azad – Appellant
Versus
Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this writ petition, the petitioners approached this Court, feeling aggrieved by the fact that the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh was charging enrollment fee in excess of what was prescribed under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961.
2. When this matter was being heard by this Court, the Court was informed that similar issue was pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
3. Now, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in terms of judgment dated 30.07.2024, passed in Writ Petition (C) No. 352 of 2023, titled Gaurav Kumar Vs. Union of India and Others. (2025) 1 SCC 641, has been pleased to declare the act of the State Bar Councils of charging enrollment fee beyond the express mandate of Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, to be bad in law. The conclusions of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court are quoted hereinbelow:-
“I. Conclusions
118. In view of the above discussion, we conclude that:
118.1. SBCs cannot charge "enrolment fees" beyond the express legal stipulation under Section 24(1)(f) as it currently stands, 118.2. Section 24(1)(f) specifically lays down the fiscal preconditions subject to which an advocate can be en
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 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.
The court affirmed the statutory enrollment fee limit set by the Advocates Act, ordering the refund of excess fees collected.
(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 – ....
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.
The Bar Council cannot charge fees for the verification of educational certificates as mandated by the Supreme Court.
The court affirmed that pending criminal cases can disqualify candidates from enrollment as advocates, emphasizing the need for integrity in the legal profession.
The court reaffirmed that fee fixation determined by a committee must apply prospectively and cannot retroactively impose a refund on students admitted prior to the fee committee's ruling.
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
