W.P.(C) 12116/2022

Page 1 of 6

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of decision: 23^rd SEPTEMBER, 2022

IN THE MATTER OF:

+

W.P.(C) 12116/2022 & CM APPL. 36228/2022

PANKAJ KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through:

Mr.

Srikant

Prasad

and

Mr.

Dewashish Viswakarma, Advocates.

versus

BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI AND ORS

..... Respondents

Through:

Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with

Mr. Danish Faraz Khan, Advocate for

R-3.

Mr.

Anuj

Aggarwal,

ASC

for

GNCTD with Ms. Ayushi Bansal and

Mr. Sanyam Suri, Advocates for R-4.

CORAM:

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

JUDGMENT

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

1.

The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

has been filed as a Public Interest Litigation with the following prayers:

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003847

W.P.(C) 12116/2022

Page 2 of 6

2.

The Petitioner, who is 29 years of age, is a young advocate, who has

enrolled himself in the Bar Council of Delhi and cleared the AIBE

Examination in the year 2021. He is presently working as a junior in the

chambers of a Senior Advocate. The Petitioner by way of the instant Public

Interest Litigation wants to highlight the difficulties being faced by newly

enrolled advocates who are finding themselves in a position where they

cannot sustain themselves in Delhi. It is stated that the young advocates are

unable to arrange for their accommodation, food, travelling and other

expenses, and without there being any proper and consistent source of

income, they are unable to make both ends meet.

3.

It is stated by the Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner that Bar Council of

India has issued a notification granting a minimum stipend for a sum of

Rs.5,000/- to all the young advocates for the initial three years of their

practice. It is stated that many junior advocates are not paid anything by

their seniors owing to which they are unable to concentrate on the

profession. It is also stated that a survey conducted by Vidhi Centre for

Legal Policy demonstrates that more than 79% of the Advocates across 7

High Courts with less than two years of legal practice at the Bar are earning

less than Rs.10,000/- per month.

4.

The Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner by way of the instant Public

Interest Litigation further highlights the unavailability of space for newly

enrolled Advocates where they can sit and entertain clients. It is stated that

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/003847

W.P.(C) 12116/2022

Page 3 of 6

there are no rules to accommodate the newly enrolled Advocates in the

chambers.

5.

The Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon a similar Public Interest

Litigation filed in the High Court of Bombay seeking a permanent stipend

scheme for junior lawyers with an annual income of less than Rs. 1 lakh for

the first three years of their practice and states that the High Court of

Bombay has issued notices to the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa. It is

further stated that the High Court of Chhattisgarh and the High Court of

Allahabad have also issued notices in similar Public Interest Litigations filed

on the very same issue. The Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner also relies upon

the decision of the Government of Kerala wherein sanction was accorded to

pay a monthly stipend of a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month to junior lawyers of

a specified category, payable out of the Welfare Fund created under Kerala

Advocates’ Welfare Fund Act, 1980.

6.

Heard Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and perused the material on

record.

7.

Undoubtedly, the Petitioner has highlighted the problems being faced

by the young lawyers who have enrolled in this noble profession. This Court

can take judicial notice of the fact that youngsters, who have just enrolled

themselves as Advocates, face immense difficulties in sustaining themselves

owing to the high cost of living in Delhi. It is indeed very difficult