Antics of Bar Council of India or State Bar Councils

Posted on July 1 by ShadesOfKnife

Despite being a statutory bodies, there are many instances where the Bar Council of India or various State Bar Councils has crossed their statutory limits and embarked on a journey which is legally called as Colourable exercise of power granted by Parliament to them. The following is just a small list of cases that came to my notice.

From 1996 – 2000:

Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani Vs Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa on 8 Apr 1996 [SC: Cannot practice as an advocate under the Advocates Act, 1961 as well as a medical practitioner who does not want to give up his medical practice but wants simultaneously to practice law]

From 2016 – 2020:

Rishabh Duggal vs Bar Council of India on 12 Mar 2019 [SC: BCI imposed age limit]
Bar Council of Kerala Vs T.Koshy on 12 Apr 2018 [KerHC: Bar Council of Kerala does not have power to prescribe any fee for the enrolment, either in the form of enrolment fee or special fee]
Braj Mohan Mahajan Vs Bar Council of State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors on 11 Sep 2018 [MPHC: A person who is not convicted but merely accused cannot be denied entry into the State Bar Council rolls]
Bar Council of Kerala Vs Raju Y and Anr on 04 Jan 2019 [SC: Bar Council (of any State or India) do not have power to prescribe any fee for the enrolment, either in the form of enrolment fee or special fee.]

From 2021 – 2025:

Bar Council of India Vs Bonnie Foi Law College and Ors on 10 Feb 2023 [SC: BCI is empowered to conduct AIBE and it is a valid exam]
Are State Bar Councils Statutorily empowered to Levy Fees for Gaps in academics during Enrollment? [SC: Bar Council of AP charged me an additional Rs.7000/- as fees towards the gap in my academic, before enrollment and my case was transferred to Supreme Court and clubbed with many other such cases and eventually SCI held that Bar Councils cannot charge fees under any name beyond what is permitted in Advocates Act, 1961]

From 2026 – 2030:

Rajashekar Vs BCI and Anr on 27 Oct 2025 [KarHC: Persons can be admitted as advocates on a State roll even if they completed LL.B. outside the State]
Vijay Gopal Vs Bar Council of India and Anr on 29 Apr 2026 [TelHC: Membership with a Bar Association is not mandatory to practice Law in the State]
Are BCI and State Bar Councils Statutorily empowered to Levy Fees for Transfer of Enrollment? []

MASTER INDEX is here.

Vijay Gopal Vs Bar Council of India and Anr on 29 Apr 2026

Posted on July 1 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge bench of Telangana High Court held as follows,

From Para 4.1,

4.1 The petitioner, appearing in person, contends that Rule 6 of the Rules, 2015 is ex facie illegal, arbitrary, and ultra vires the provisions of the Act, 1961, particularly Sections 22, 30, and 33. It is argued that the statutory scheme unequivocally confers upon an enrolled Advocate the right to practice law, and such right is neither conditional nor subject to compulsory membership in any Bar Association.

From Para 4.4,

4.4. The petitioner further contends that the impugned rule violates the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(c) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It is argued that the freedom to form associations inherently includes the right not to associate, as recognized in Damayanti Naranga v. Union of India (1971) 1 SCC 678. Therefore, any compulsion to join a Bar Association infringes this constitutional guarantee.

From Para 5.2,

5.2. The respondents argue that the impugned rules, including Rule 6.1, are within the statutory framework and are intended to regulate and identify practicing Advocates, as well as to ensure effective implementation of welfare schemes. It is specifically contended that Rule 6 does not mandate compulsory membership in any Bar Association; rather, it provides an option. An Advocate may either become a member of a recognized Bar Association or, alternatively, intimate the State Bar Council regarding non-membership and indicate how he or she proposes to avail welfare benefits.

From Para 5.4,

5.4. The respondents also contend that the requirement of certification and verification is intended solely to identify genuine practitioners and facilitate welfare distribution. There is no violation of Article 19, as the rules neither compel association membership nor restrict the right to practice.

From Para 8,

8. At the outset, Sections 29, 30, and 33 of the Act, 1961 unequivocally recognize Advocates as the only class of persons entitled to practice law, subject to enrolment under the Act. The statutory scheme does not expressly mandate membership in any Bar Association as a condition precedent to the exercise of such right.

From Paras 12 and 13,

12. A plain reading of Rule 6 indicates that membership in a Bar Association is not mandatory. The provision merely affords an option to an Advocate either to join a Bar Association or, in the alternative, to intimate the State Bar Council regarding such non-membership for the purpose of availing welfare benefits. When construed in this manner, the rule can be sustained as a regulatory measure. Notably, the respondents have also urged that the rule be interpreted in this light.
13. In such circumstances, the requirement would fall within the ambit of Sections 6, 7, and 49(1)(ah) of the Act, 1961, as a condition governing the right to practice, aimed at identifying genuine practitioners and facilitating the implementation of welfare schemes.

Finally from Para 17,

17. In view of the foregoing analysis, Rule 6 of the Rules, 2015 is read down to the following extent:
a) Membership in a Bar Association shall be purely voluntary;
b) Non-membership shall not disentitle or restrict an Advocate from practicing law;
c) Bar Associations shall not exercise any determinative or regulatory control over the right to practice.

Call to Action:

18. Accordingly, Respondent No. 1, namely the Bar Council of India, New Delhi, is directed to issue appropriate clarifications to all State Bar Councils. The requirement of certification and verification shall be implemented solely as a regulatory mechanism for availing welfare measures and not as a means of imposing coercive conditions.

Vijay Gopal Vs Bar Council of India and Anr on 29 Apr 2026

Citations: [2026 LiveLaw (Tel) 86]

Other Sources:

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/137307844/

https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/telangana-high-court/telangana-high-court-bar-associations-exercise-regulatory-control-advocate-right-to-practice-538287

https://www.verdictum.in/telangana-high-court/vijay-gopal-v-bar-council-of-india-anr-bar-council-of-india-membership-1613590

Index of Bar Council Antics is here.

Are State Bar Councils Statutorily empowered to Levy Fees for Gaps in academics during Enrollment?

Posted on May 15, 2022 by ShadesOfKnife

Goal: To question the legal basis on which Bar Council of AP is charging fees for any gaps in academics of a LL.B Graduate during Advocate enrollment process, apart from taking an affidavit to that effect.

Note: Similar efforts initiated here to tackle the illegal fees charged for Transferring enrolment from one State to another. Pathetic that one has to fight his own parent organizations.

During my enrollment process, Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh (BC-AP) had asked me to pay Rs.7000/- towards 10+ years of gap between my last graduation and LL.B degree. Since I did not believe then that BC-AP (no State Bar Council, for that matter!) never had any statutory power to levy and collect such fees, I paid the said fees duly through SBI Bank challan. My enrollment finished successfully with BC-AP on 17 March 2022 and I became an advocate enrolled with BC-AP (AP/646/2022)… Yippeee!!!

But later, I noticed from other friends who enrolled with Other State Bar Councils, that they were NOT charged any fees for gaps in their academics. This led me to dig deeper and to my astonishment, yes, indeed, no State Bar Council has any statutory power to levy any fees other than that is prescribed in Advocates Act 1961. This decision from Kerala High Court nailed it here (WP before single bench) and here (appeal to Division Bench). The icing on the cake is Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLPs with a 1-liner here. Armed with this information, I decided to challenge BC-AP on this aspect and recover my fees from them.

Steps Taken:

1. Filed a 1-page Representation to BC-AP

2. Filed a 1-page RTI application to BC-AP

I received a missed call from Bar Council landline on 23-May-2022, but none spoke when I called back. Hmmmm!

3. Received this reply from BC-AP. Interesting Answers!

2022-06-02 Reply to RTI application

Interestingly, BCI has earlier in March replied to my RTI application stating that, they do NOT have any knowledge if any State Bar Council is charging fees for gaps in academics. The following is the proof. So BC-AP doing naughty things without knowledge of (AND necessary ratification/approval from) BCI. Spooky…!

2022-03-05 BCIND R E 22 00126-No Knowledge as to State BC taking fee for Gap during enrollment

4. Filed another RTI seeking more information about the resolution that BC-AP passed basis which they are levying unauthorized fees for gaps in academics.

5. Got a reply on 27-Jun-2022.

P10 2022-06-27 Reply to RTI application dt 2022-06-14

6. WP against BC-AP and make BCI as respondent no.2. Petition ready. To be filed on 23rd August, 2022. After 3 weeks of to and fro with Filing Section, the Writ Petition is numbered and will be listed next Monday, tentatively.

Here is the copy of petition filed.

2022-09-12 WP against Gap fees by BC-AP v2.0

7. The WP is listed before Court-14, for Sep 19, 2022 Monday for Initial hearing before Hon’ble Single Bench to issue notices to Respondents. But the Judge was on leave so obtained a new date from Justice Ninnala Jayasurya.

8. As per the interim Order passed, the WP was supposed to be listed on 21-Sep-2022, but it was not listed. What do I do now?

2022-09-19 Sandeep Pamarati Vs the Secretary BCAP and Anr

9. Today noticed that a senior advocate has filed vakalath in the case. Nice…

10.Sent an email to BCI (at [email protected]) hoping for some positive help…

… and waiting for listing of the case… Not going to mention the matter. Let’s see…

11. The email kind of worked! Actually I had reached out to the Standing Counsel for BCI at AP High Court also with same request to transfer my WP also to Supreme Court just like others here. But I was made aware about this case by my dear friend Dr. Parasar Sarvepalli (https://498anlr.wordpress.com) in March 2024!!!

… Phewwwwwwwwww… In total there are 10 more cases tagged with mine… Hehe… Mine got tagged to them…

Since I was not aware about this case until March 2024, I could not participate in the case proceedings virtually. Considering that my original WP at AP High Court is no longer relevant, I stopped pursuing it before APHC. One less headache.

2023-Oct-17

My petition [hehe actually BCI’s transfer petition against my WP at APHC: Transfer Petition (Civil) No.2734/2023)] was listed and heard.

Secretary BCI Vs Sandeep Pamarati and Anr on 17 Oct 2023

Notice was issued, but I received no notice, that is because my address in the memo of parties is old address where I do not live anymore. 🙁 So sent another email on 08-Mar-2024 (Mahasivarathri)…

The bundle was last listed on 2024-01-17. Next computer-generated date is on 18-03-2024 before 3-Judge FULL bench (Court-1 of CJI)

Do not know what happened on 18-03-2024 but the case (and the bundle) is adjourned to 08-04-2024.

2024-03-18 Gaurav Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors on 18 Mar 2024

Seems my case was not reached on 08-04-2024. The case is adjourned to 22-04-2024.

22-04-2024:

Arguments heard and concluded. Judgment reserved.

2024-04-22 Gaurav Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors on 22 Apr 2024

30-07-2024:

Judgment pronounced. I won. But not all prayers are granted.

2024-07-30 Gaurav Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors on 30 Jul 2024

18-12-2024:

Filed the below Written Arguments, only to get this WP closed. I have no hope that HC Registry will close it proactively.

2024-12-16 Written Arguments in W.P. No. 30232 of 2022

15-02-2025

Phew!! At last the WP is closed.

2025-03-21 Sandeep Pamarati Vs the Secretary BCAP and Anr

Index of the Bar Council Antics is here.

Index of my life goals here.

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: Colourable Exercise of Power by Bar Council

Antics of Bar Council of India or State Bar Councils

Vijay Gopal Vs Bar Council of India and Anr on 29 Apr 2026

Are State Bar Councils Statutorily empowered to Levy Fees for Gaps in academics during Enrollment?