The Supreme Court of India recently addressed a critical issue concerning the enrollment fees charged by State Bar Councils across the country. This matter arose from a writ petition filed against the Union Government, Bar Council of India (BCI), and various State Bar Councils, alleging that the fees being charged were exorbitant and in violation of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Legal Framework: Advocates Act, 1961
Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961 stipulates that for an individual to be admitted as an advocate, a fee of Rs. 600 must be paid to the respective State Bar Council and Rs. 150 to the Bar Council of India. For applicants belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes, the fees are reduced to Rs. 100 and Rs. 25 respectively. Despite these clear legal provisions, various State Bar Councils have been charging significantly higher fees.
Supreme Court’s Observations
A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, addressed the issue, highlighting the financial burden these exorbitant fees impose on aspiring lawyers, particularly those from economically weaker backgrounds. The Court observed that the high fees violate the statutory provisions and emphasized that the law graduates should not be required to pay more than the stipulated amount of Rs. 600.
Disparities in Enrollment Fees
The Supreme Court was informed of the vast differences in enrollment fees across various states. For instance, Odisha charges Rs. 42,100, Gujarat Rs. 25,000, Uttarakhand Rs. 23,650, Jharkhand Rs. 21,460, and Kerala Rs. 20,050. These discrepancies were highlighted by the petitioners as arbitrary and unjustified.
Arguments from State Bar Councils and BCI
The State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India defended the higher fees, citing inflation and the necessity to fund welfare schemes and operational costs. They argued that the Rs. 600 fee, set in 1993, is outdated and insufficient to cover the current expenses. The BCI also mentioned that 80% of the fee is retained by the State Bar Councils while 20% goes to the BCI, suggesting that a revision of the fee structure might be necessary to sustain their activities.
Supreme Court’s Directive
The Supreme Court emphasized that any change in the fee structure must come through legislative amendments by Parliament. The Court noted the necessity for Parliament to revisit and potentially revise the enrollment fee to ensure it reflects current economic realities while remaining fair and just for new law graduates.
Implications of the Ruling
This ruling by the Supreme Court has significant implications for the legal profession in India. It addresses the financial barriers faced by aspiring lawyers and ensures compliance with the statutory provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961. The decision also calls for a reevaluation of the funding mechanisms for State Bar Councils and the BCI, potentially leading to legislative changes that could modernize and rationalize the enrollment fee structure.
The Supreme Court’s intervention in this matter underscores its commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the legal profession remains accessible to all, irrespective of economic background. The outcome of this case will likely influence future policies and regulations governing the legal profession in India.
Our dedicated team gathers information from all the reliable sources to make the law accessible and understandable for everyone. We provide the latest legal news stories from across the country, delivered straight to you.
