Back
Law Graduates Must Pass Within Two Years or Face Practice Ban:
In a significant ruling that clarifies the rights of newly enrolled advocates, the has held that law graduates from the onwards must clear the within two years of their , or they will be barred from practicing in any court, tribunal, or authority.
The judgment, delivered by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, arose from a criminal bail application where the applicant's counsel, , had not passed the within the stipulated period. Though the court permitted him to argue as a , it took up the larger issue , calling for assistance from the , , and the .
The Two-Year Rule for Practice
The court framed two key questions: First, whether law students who graduated from 2009-10 onward and were enrolled under could continue practice without qualifying the . Second, whether advocates who fail to verify their after five years lose the right to practice.
Referencing the 's resolution dated , the court noted that while such graduates may be provisionally enrolled for two years and are allowed to practice during that period, the clock starts ticking immediately. If they do not clear the within those two years, their enrollment is automatically cancelled and they cease to be entitled to practice.
Justice Deshwal observed:
"if they fail to qualify the
within two years, then they will not be entitled to practice in any court, any Tribunal or any other authority."
The court also clarified that this restriction applies to all courts, including revenue courts from the level of Tehsildar up to the
, as per the definition of "court" under the
.
Verification
On the second question, the court held that even if an advocate has not renewed or verified their after five years, they can continue to practice until the publishes the list of non-practicing advocates under Rule 20.4 of the Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015. This provides a for advocates to comply with renewal requirements.
Administrative Directions
The court issued several administrative directions to streamline the process. It ordered the Chairman and Secretary of the to issue within four weeks of receiving the result card. The Director General of Police was directed to complete of intending advocates within two weeks of receiving the verification form. The Advocate Roll Section of the High Court was asked to the names of advocates who fail to clear the within two years, after issuing a .
Key Observations
The judgment emphasized the critical role of the legal profession in protecting civil and constitutional rights. It quoted the 's decision in v. Bonnie Foi Law College ( ), which upheld the BCI's power to mandate the . The court also noted that the had clarified as early as that advocates who fail the within two years are but can continue to appear for the exam without any limit on attempts.
Implications
This ruling sends a clear message to law graduates: the is not a mere formality but a mandatory gateway to the profession. It also imposes accountability on state bar councils to process enrollments swiftly. For the thousands of provisionally enrolled advocates across Uttar Pradesh, the clock is now ticking – and the High Court has made it plain that failing to clear the within two years will mean losing the right to practice until they do.
