Published on February 20, 2014
Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) Monday, the Third day of February Two Thousand Fourteen Present The Hon’ble Mr.JusticeK.Kirubakaran WP(MD) No.10315 of 2013 ….Petitioner V.Ramesh Vs 1. The Chief Secretary Government of Tamilnadu, 2. The Law Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu, 3. The Chairman, Tamilnadu Bar Council, 4. The Union of India 5. The Secretary, Law & Justice, Union Of India 6. The Bar Council of India 7. The Law Commission of India 8. The University Grants Commission
9. The Tamilnadu and Puducherry Bar Federation 10.MMBA 11.MBHAA 12.Madras Bar Association 13.Madras High Court Advocates Association 14.Women Lawyers Association 15.Madurai Bar Association 16.The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh 17.The Bar Council of Karnataka 18.The Chief Secretary to Govt. Of Andrapradesh 19.The Chief Secretary to Govt. Of Karnataka 20.The Director General of Police, Tamilnadu 21.A.Jegan, Madurai 22.V.Santhanam, Madurai 23.Mr.Thiyagarajan, President of MAHAA, Madurai. 24.Dr.Ambetkar Law College, Renigunta. 25.MAHAS 26.All India Lawyers Union
27.R27 28.The Registrar General, Madras High Court 29.R.Esthov Antony Ashok, Madurai 30.The CBI, Chennai 31.Dr.Ambetkar Law University, Chennai 32.The Registrar, Andhra University, Visakapatnam 33.The Registrar, Venkateswara University, Tirupathi. 34.The Registrar, Dr.B.R.Ambetkar University, Andrapradesh 35.The Registrar, DahodaramEanhivayar National Law University, Vishagapatnam 36.The Registrar, AcharayaNagarjuna University, Andrapradesh 37.The Registrar, StiKrishnadevaraya University, Anantapur 38.The Registrar, Sri Padmavathymahila University, Andrapradesh 39.The Registrar, Chattisgarh University, Chattisgarh 40.The Registrar, University of Mysore, Mysore 41.The Registrar, University of Pune, Pune 42.The Registrar, Andhra University Andrapradesh 43.The Registrar,Getim University Visakapatnam
44.The Registrar, Gulbarga University, Gulbarga 45.The Registrar, Karnatak University, Dharwad 46.The Registrar, Karnataka State Law University, Hubli 47.The Registrar, Kuvempu University, Shimoga 48.The Registrar, Mangalore University, Mangalore Petition praying that on the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High court will be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction in the nature of writ directing the 3rd Respondent to frame appropriate guidelines as enshrined in this affidavit and those which may be framed by this Honble Court by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 03.04.2013, before enrolling candidate law graduating from other states, before the 3rd Respondent herein. ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S W.PETER RAMESH KUMAR, Advocate for the petitioner the court made the following order :During the hearing, it is brought to the notice of this court that the Bar Council Of India, in some cases, enrolled the persons (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Who got admissions and completed Law course in contravention of Rule 28 (Rule relating ceiling on age of the students for admission); Misrepresentation to the Bar Council; Suppression of criminal cases; Violation of undertaking given before the Bar Council of TamilNadu.
2. A few examples have been given by Mr.PeterRameshkumar which are as follows: (i) (ii) (iii) Karmegam, whose enrolment No. is 1319/2013 against whom a criminal case has been pending in F.I.R. No. 78 of 2010; central crime Branch, Madurai and said fact was suppressed by the said candidate in the undertaking given in the application for entolment Pandikamatchi’s enrolment No. is 1933/2013 and date of birth is 09.05.1969 and he got admissison into Law college on 14.07.2006 in violation of Rule 28 of the Legal Education Rules; and Joseph Arul Jayaseelan’s enrolment No. id 1305/2013 and date of birth is 31.05.1973 and was detained under GOONDAS ACT and he is a history sheeter also. 3. In the enrolment form itself there is a column with regard to the undertaking which reads as follows: “N.B: SECTION 26(1) OF THE ADVOCATES ACT, 1961 PROVIDES THAT BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA MAY IF SATISFIED EITHER OF PREFERENCE MADE TO IT IN THIS BEHALF OF OTHERWISE THAT ANY PERSON HAS GOT HIS NAME ENTERED ON THE ROLL OF ADVOCATES BY MISREPRESENTATION AS TO AN ESSENTIAL FACT OR BY FRAUD OR UNDUE INFLUENCE REMOVE THE NAME OF SUCH PERSON FROM THE ROLL OF ADVOCATES AFTER GIVING HIM AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD” And below the aforesaid undertaking only the applicant affixes his/her signature, If any violation of undertaking is found and any fraudulent representation has been made and that by the enrolment was made and the law admission and degree have been obtained in contraventrion of Rule 28, the Bar council of Tamil Nadu has got all the powers to remove the said candidate from the enrolment list, after giving opportunity to him, As
an interim measure the Bar council of Tamil Nadu shall take initiate action against those persons, who are found to be guilt of those violations. 4. Section 24 of the Advocates Act 1961 speaks about the persons, who may be admitted as Advocates on a State roll, which reads as follows: 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 fulfills 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 3[12th day of March, 1967], 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 1[(iii) after the 12th day of March, 1967, save as provided in sub-clause (iiia), 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 (iiia) 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] 2[(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; 3[he is barrister and is called to the Bar on or before the 31st day of December, 1976 4[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;] 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;] 5[***] (e) he fulfils such other conditions as may be specified in the rules made by the State Bar Council under this Chapter; 6[(f) he has paid, in respect of the enrolment, stamp duty, if any, chargeable under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899), and an enrolment fee payable to the State Bar Council of 7[six hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of India, one hundred and fifty rupees by way of a bank draft drawn in favour of that Council]: Provided that where such person is a member of the Schedule Castes or the Schedule Tribes and produces a certificate to that effect from such authority as may be prescribed, the enrolment fee payable by him to the Sttate Bar Council shall be 1[one hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of India, twenty-five rupees]. 2[Explanation.—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 that 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), 3[a vakil or a pleader who is a law graduate] may be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if he—
(a) 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). 4[(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) a person who— (a) 5[***] has, for at least three years, been a vakil or pleader or a mukhtar, or, was entitled at any time to be enrolled under any law 6[***] 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 7[(aa) before the Ist day of December, 1961, was entitled otherwise than as an advocate practise the profession of law (whether by of pleading or acting or both) by virtue of the provision of any law, or who would have been so entitled had he not been in public service on the said date; or] 1[***] (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 condittions specified in clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f) of sub-section (1).] 5. Though the learned counsel for the Bar council of Tamil Nadu expressed some doubts regarding the power to suspend and to cancel the enrolment, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu which enrolled the candidates, has got all powers to suspend and cancel the enrolment, if there is
violation. By the same provision, the Bar Council has got incidental, auxiliary and implied powers to suspend and cancel the enrolment in the case of violation or misconduct. Even if it is not provided under the Act, by virtue of Section 16 of the General Clauses Act, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has got power. 6. If any Rules are framed by the Bar Council of India, the same is binding on the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and other States. One sush Rule is Rule 28 of Legal Education with regard to ceiling on age of the candidates to get admission into Law College. Those candidates who got admission in violation of any of the Rules including Rule 28 of Legal Education are not entitled to get enrolment. If anybody got already enrolled, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has got power to take action including suspension and to remove as per law. 7. In view of that, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu is directed to find out the violations in the matter of enrolment of candidates including those above three candidates and similarly placed persons and the candidates, who got admissions into Law college after June 2009 and take appropriate action including suspension first and to remove then after enquiry. -End-
This is a draft Interim order of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court on 03.02.2014
Share Namit Sharma Interim Order. ... recalling the Court's order with prayer for interim relief and office report) ... Interim order madurai_hc_03_02_2014.