Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 1995 (1) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
1995 (1) TMI 382 - SC - Indian LawsWhether person who has completed the age of 45 years on the date on which he submits his application for his enrollment as an advocate to the State Bar Council shall not be enrolled as an advocate? Held that:- On the plain language of the said clause it seems clear to us that under the said provision the Bar Council of India can lay down the ’conditions’ subject to which ’an advocate’ shall have the right to practise These conditions which the Bar Council of India lay down are applicable, i.e., a person who has already been enrolled as an advocate by the concerned State Bar Council. The conditions which can be prescribed must apply at the post - enrolment stage since they are expected to relate to the right to practise. By the impugned rule, the entry of those who have completed 45 cars at the date of application for enrolment is sought to be barred. The rule clearly operates, at the pre-enrolment stage and cannot, therefore, receive the shelter of clauses (ah) of Section 49(1) of the Act. Under the said clause conditions applicable to an advocate touching his right to practise can be laid down, and if laid down he must exercise his right subject to those conditions. But the language of the said clause does not permit laying down of cautions Am entry, into tic profession. We have, therefore, no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that clause (ah) of Section (1) of the Act does not empower the Bar Council of India to frame a rule barring persons who have completed 45 years of age from enrolment as an advocate. The impugned rule is, therefore, ultra vires the said provision. We are unable to subscribe to the view that all those who have completed the age of 45 years and an: otherwise eligible to be enrolled as advocates constitute a class or category which can be disqualified as single block from entering the profession. Besides, as stated above clause (ag) identification and specification of a class or category of persons ’entitled’ to be enrolled as advocates and not ’disentitled’ to be enrolled as an advocates. We, therefore, are of the opinion the impugned rule is beyond the rule making power of the Bar Council of India and is, therefore, ultra vires the Act. It is unreasonable and arbitrary as the choice of the age of 45 years is made keeping only a certain group in mind ignoring the vast majority of other persons who were in the service of government or quasi-government or similar institutions at any point of time. Thus, in our view the impugned rule violates the principle of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution. These petitions succeed. The new rule 9 inserted in Chapter III extracted in the opening paragraph of this judgment is struck down as ultra vires the Act and opposed to Article 14 of the Constitution.
|