Procedural delays were set to derail the discussions on the merits in the All India bar examination court challenges, as the Supreme Court has adjourned the hearing in the transfer petition to 20 October after ordering the issue of fresh notices to the respondents and the shifting of the case to the Delhi High Court was not mentioned.
The petitions were grouped together as the case Bar Council of India vs Babubhai Vaghela & Ors (TP(C) No 697-702/2010) and was heard in the registrar’s court today after having being taken up for the first time by the chief justice’s court on 2 August.
The only public interest litigation (PIL) filed before the SC by a Delhi University law graduate was dismissed at that first hearing.
The matter was listed before the registrar S G Shah and Nalsar Hyderabad graduate Fatehpal Singh was the only respondent present, said Singh.
According to Singh the court wanted to give the respondents an opportunity to come forth and make their representations as most including him had not been served despite the earlier SC order requesting service at the 2 August hearing.
A junior advocate appeared on behalf of BCI’s council Sanjeey Sachdeva.
It is understood that senior advocate Dushyant Dave has been instructed to appear for respondent Babubhai Vaghela who filed the first writ petition against the bar exam in the Gujarat High Court in June.
The bar exam is scheduled to be held on 5 December, with the BCI having vowed to pursue individuals and law colleges whose students practised law without having passed the bar exam.
The BCI has published the bar exam preparatory materials and model questions last week. Two thirds of 57 voters in a Legally India poll last week said that they would definitely pass the exam after studying, with more than half being “quite” or “very” confident of passing the exam without studying.
Photo by comedynose
Comments
The last date for submission of Bar Council Examination form is 30th September i.e. before the date of hearing in the court.
After this delay and a long date, law students throughout the country are left with no option but to submit there exam forms.
It is not the question whether the law students would find it easy or tough to pass examination, the clear picture is that the Advocates Act, 1961 does not require an enrolled advocate to pass any examination for Right to Practice.
The same have been decided in V. Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India 1999(3) SCC 176, that the Bar Council of India has no authority to make any rules out of the four squares of the ACT.
Such delay in hearing may lead to injustice to lakhs of law students throughout the country.
It is an "OPEN AND SHUT" case in which the court may easily find that the Bar Council of India has acted beyond its power or authority, but the delay in judgment is causing hardship and even unemployment to the law graduates of this academic year.
Students firmly believe that on the next date of hearing the court would quash the Resolution of the Bar Council of India for the Bar Council Exam and the justice would prevail.
Now as per the ADVOCATES ACT person who is enrolled as an advocate on the State Roll have RIGHT TO PRACTICE.
Thus what's the point of taking EXAM when the BAR COUNCIL'S have already provided the ENROLLMENT NUMBERS AND CERTIFICATES.
If anyone have Email Id Of Gopal Subramanium, the Chairman of the All India Bar Examination. Than publish here on discussion.
Let us send a request email to Chairman with a Subject that "We Are Not Against The Bar Exam but It must be before the Final Year Exam" & not after Enrolment as An Advocate.
One thing we need to appreciate and very few people in india will be denying on the knowledge and ability of our Chairman of Bar Council of India, what Mr.Subharminum has done by the making us appear for the exam is after the registration is done that is after we are enrolled as an advocate and that is the law that is being laid down in V. Sudeer vs. Bar Council of India 1999(3) SCC 176 what is being restricted or beyond the power of BCI is to impose Pre-condition for the person coming to this profession. BCI has absolute power to impose conditions once a person is being enrolled as an advocate.
So what The Chairman has done is absolutely within his domain. The only thing i feel like what can be challenged is the time when this notifaction came that is very important and the fee part of it and the degree that everone of us had slooged to get i.e LLB is of no use .SO lets put our head down and pray that we clear the exams.
ALL THE BEST
RAM
Fatepal singh I must tell u that i have become a great fan of yours. Hats off to you.
another thing z that, i read on ths site tht 57% students r sayin tht they will pass exam easily...bt let me remind u tht users of ths site r from top law colleges in country only not d student frm any backward area law school....naturally d urban student wil find it easy to go through d exam...bt d major part of law graduates in india z formed by students from colleges in rural or backward area who r really unable to understand even d nature of questions in AIBE....i dont think they will pass this exam easily. i truly observed ths thing...and once you denie them right to practice thre would be a political issue of unemployment.....so its better for BCI to put quality education controll over d colleges and to take such entrance exam before d admission to LLB. this wil neither break law laid down by SC in 1999 case or Advocates Act, nor it wil cause any injustice to d students who wil b victim of such a meaningless hurdle..