Breaking News/Supreme Court decision on advocates enrolment fees.
Supreme Court decision on advocates enrolment fees.
The Supreme Court of India has capped advocate enrolment fees at Rs. 600, stating that State Bar Councils cannot charge more than this statutory limit.
The Supreme Court of India recently delivered a significant ruling regarding the enrolment fees charged by State Bar Councils for new advocates. The ruling, based on Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961, mandates that the enrolment fee must not exceed Rs. 600.
WHAT IS SECTION 24(1)(f)?
24. Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a State roll.
(1)Subject to the provisions of this Act, and the rules made thereunder, a person shall be qualified to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if he fulfils the following conditions, namely
(a)he is a citizen of India:Provided that subject to the other provisions contained in this Act, a national of any other country may be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if citizens of India, duly qualified, are permitted to practise law in that other country
(b)he has completed the age of twenty-one years
(c)he has obtained a degree in law(i)before the [12th day of March, 1967,] [ Substituted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18, for ” 28th day of February, 1963″ (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).]from any University in the territory of India; or(ii)before the 15th August, 1947, from any University in any area which was comprised before that date within India as defined by the Government of India Act, 1935; or(iii)[ after the 12th day of March, 1967, save as provided in sub-clause (iii-a), after undergoing a three year course of study in law from any University in India which is recognised for the purposes of this Act by the Bar Council of India; or ] [ Substituted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18, for sub-Cl(iii) (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).](iii-a) after undergoing a course of study in law, the duration of which is not less than two academic years commencing from the academic year 1967-68 or any earlier academic year from any University in India which is recognised for the purposes of this Act by the Bar Council of India; or
iv)[ in any other case, from any University outside the territory of India, if the degree is recognised for the purposes of this Act by the Bar Council of India or;] [ Inserted by Act 21 of 1964, Section 13.][he is a barrister and is called to the Bar on or before the 31st day of December, 1976;[or has passed the article clerks examination or any other examination specified by the High Court at Bombay or Calcutta for enrolment as an attorney of that High Court;] [ Substituted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18, for ” he is a barrister” (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).] or has obtained such other foreign qualification in law as is recognised by the Bar Council of India for the purpose of admission as an advocate under this Act;][* * *] [ Clause (d) omitted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18 (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).]
e)he fulfils such other conditions as may be specified in the rules made by the State Bar Council under this Chapter
(f)[ he has paid, in respect of the enrolment, stamp duty, if any, chargeable under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2of 1899), and an enrolment fee payable to the State Bar Council] [ Substituted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18, for Clause (f) (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).] of [six hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of India, one hundred and fifty rupees by way of a bank draft drawn in favourof that Council] [[Substituted by Act 70 of 1993, Section 6, for ” two hundred and fifty rupees” (w.e.f. 26.12.1993).]]:Provided that where such person is a member of the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes and produces a certificate to that effect from such authority as may be prescribed, the enrolment fee payable by him to the State Bar Council shall be [one hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of India, twenty-five rupees] [ Substituted by Act 70 of 1993, Section 6, for ” one hundred and twenty-five rupees” (w.e.f. 26.12.1993).].[Explanation [ Inserted by Act 14 of 1962, Section 2.].For the purposes of this sub-section, a person shall be deemed to have obtained a degree in law from a University in India on the date on which the results of the examination for that degree are published by the University on its notice board or otherwise declaring him to have passed that examination
(2)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), [a vakil or a pleader who is a law graduate] [ Substituted by Act 21 of 1964, Section 64, Section 13, for certain words.] may be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if he
makes an application for such enrolment in accordance with the provisions of this Act, not later than two years from the appointed day; and
(b)fulfils the conditions specified in clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f) of sub-section (1).(3)[ Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) a person who] [ Inserted by Act 21 of 1974, Section 13
](a)[* * *] [ The words and figures ” before the 31st day of March, 1964″ omitted by Act 33 of 1968, Section 2 (w.e.f. 5.6.1968).] has, for at least three years, been a vakil or a pleader or a mukhtar, or, was entitled at any time to be enrolled under any law [* * *] [ The words ” then in force” omitted by Act 33 of 1968, Section 2 (w.e.f. 5.6.1968)] 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] [ Inserted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18 (w.e.f. 31.1.1974).][* * *] [ Clause (b) omitted by Act 60 of 1973, Section 18 (w.ef. 31.1.1974).](c)before the 1st day of April, 1937, has been an advocate of any High Court in any area which was comprised within Burma as defined in the Government of India Act, 1935; or(d)is entitled to be enrolled as an advocate under any rule made by the Bar Council of India in this behalf,may be admitted as an advocate on a State roll if he(i)makes an application for such enrolment in accordance with the provisions of this Act; and(ii)fulfils the conditions specified in clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f) of sub-section (1).(4)[* * *] [ Sub-Section (4) omitted by Act 107 of 1976, Section 6 (w.e.f. 15.10.1976).]
RECENT OBSERVATION
Background and Key Points:
1.Legal Basis and Court’s Interpretation:
•The Advocates Act, 1961, specifically Section 24(1)(f), sets the enrolment fee at Rs. 600. The Supreme Court emphasized that this statutory provision is clear and binding, meaning no state bar council can legally charge more than this amount without legislative amendment.
2.Current Fee Disparities:
•Before this ruling, there was significant variation in enrolment fees across different states. For instance, states like Maharashtra, Kerala, and Delhi charged up to Rs. 15,000, while Odisha charged as much as Rs. 41,000. These disparities prompted petitions challenging the high fees, arguing they were prohibitive for many law graduates, especially those from economically weaker sections.
3.Supreme Court’s Observations:
•Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala highlighted that while State Bar Councils cited increased costs as justification for higher fees, any adjustment to the fee amount should be made by Parliament, not by the councils themselves.
•The Court recognized the financial hardships faced by many law graduates. For example, a petitioner from the marginalized Pardhi community had to conduct a private fundraising campaign to afford the enrolment fee.
4.Future Implications:
•The ruling aims to standardize and make the enrolment process more equitable, ensuring that financial barriers do not prevent capable individuals from entering the legal profession. This decision underscores the need for transparency and fairness in the legal profession’s administrative processes.
5.Next Steps:
•The Supreme Court has reserved its judgment on the petitions and indicated that it would ask Parliament to reconsider the fee structure. The Bar Council of India and other state councils were also directed to submit details of their enrolment fees and annual collections.
This decision by the Supreme Court not only clarifies the statutory limit on enrolment fees but also addresses broader issues of accessibility and fairness within the legal profession.
All Rights Reserved (SOHAM LAKRA)
