The Allahabad high court today dismissed as premature, a writ challenging the Bar Council of India’s yet-to-be enforced Rule 7 that bars advocates with less than five years of lower court experience from practicing in the Supreme Court.

RMLNLU Lucknow student Anubhav Verma was the lead petitioner in PIL 64058/2014 - Anubhav Verma and 9 others versus Bar Council of India and others – which was heard before noon today and was dismissed not on merits but on the ground that since the rule has not yet come into force, examining it on merits would be futile.

“We did argue that irreparable loss would be caused as ‘Heavens would [fall] if the Rules are notified even for a day but the Chief Justice said that you can challenge them with the click of a mouse the very next moment. So nothing can really be said about the constitutionality of the Rules as of now,” commented Verma.

The Madras high court last month admitted 23-year-old lawyer Akshay Mani’s writ challenging the same rule and served the BCI with a notice to respond by January. The new Rule 7 of the BCI Rules 2014, introduced this month but subject to state bar council approvals, allows only advocates with at least two years of experience practicing in a trial court to practice in high courts, followed by in turn another three years of experience practicing in a high court before practising before the Supreme Court.

The rule has not yet come into force and will become effective on a date yet to be decided by the BCI.