High Court requests assistance from the BCI Chairperson to scrutinize adherence to the ruling limiting enrollment costs
The Supreme Court of India is currently examining the compliance of State Bar Councils (SBCs) with its 2024 ruling that caps enrolment fees under the Advocates Act, 1961. The ruling, which prohibits SBCs from charging enrolment fees beyond the statutory cap, has come under scrutiny due to allegations of non-compliance.
The contempt petition, filed by KLJA Kiran Babu, alleges that several SBCs are demanding excessive fees from young lawyers, in violation of the top court's ruling. The Court has not yet issued a notice in the contempt petition but has requested the BCI Chairman, Manan Kumar Mishra, to appear and clarify the current status of compliance.
In its 2024 ruling, the Court made it clear that SBCs and the BCI cannot demand any additional payments other than the stipulated enrolment fee and applicable stamp duty. The fee cap for general category candidates is set at Rs 750, and for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates, it is Rs 125.
The Court's ruling also emphasised that any individual can move the Court in contempt for breach of its orders. It found that additional charges imposed by SBCs during enrolment, often amounting to several thousands of rupees, violated the constitutional rights of law graduates.
The Supreme Court has asked Mr. Mishra to assist in determining whether the directions are being followed in letter and spirit. The Court has also expressed its desire to know if the directions issued in the main judgment are being complied with.
The BCI Chairman is expected to clarify whether the Court's directions are being followed during the August 4 hearing. The Court has deferred the issue and sought an update directly from the BCI.
The current status is that an assessment of compliance is ongoing, with the court awaiting clarification from the BCI. The Court's clarification will provide insight into whether the SBCs are adhering to the Court's ruling and upholding the rights of law graduates.
- The ongoing assessment of compliance with the Supreme Court's 2024 ruling, which regulates policy-and-legislation concerning enrolment fees under the Advocates Act, 1961, has been fuelled by a contempt petition filed by KLJA Kiran Babu, alleging non-compliance by several State Bar Councils (SBCs).
- The Supreme Court's ruling on policy-and-legislation, which prohibits SBCs from charging excess fees, has been disputed in the political arena, with the Court requesting the BCI Chairman to appear and clarify the current compliance status during the upcoming August 4 hearing.
