LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Adv.Aiyer VLV (Proprietor)     25 September 2010

Art19(1)g violation by BCI and KSBC





AIBE was announced.

It made a rule that  students from 2009-10 batch need to pass the exam to practice

to write an exam qualified lawyers have to enrol as advocate. 

on enrolment the advocate is not in practice. He is just enrolled member of the bar council who is not in legal practice.

Bar councils are still implementing old rule that for enrolment a person can not have any other income or practice. but in the altered scenario wherein one is just enrolled member and is not in practice, this has resulted in denying the right to profession under Article 19(1)g, Right to life(livelihood) under Article 21 apart from violation of Article 14, by having un-intelliglble class of advocates being subjected to differential treatment. 

In a case of unabashed misuse of power, a CA has been asked to surrender his practice to enrol as advocate in a Bar council, his plea for considering to hold COP of CA till he can practice as an advocate unanswered, in fact it was thrown back to the CA, on the second day of interview. 

Looking at the trampling of Constitutional Right and left with no choice, he surrendered the COP, only to be told by the Bar that they want to verify letter from Institute is genuine.

The CA asked for clarification, he was asked not to talk, violating Article 19(1)f. After all an advocate is meant to talk for others rights' violation, if he asks for his right violation, bar says shut up!!!

The reason is the selection committee had committed mischief of appearing for and against the client of the CA and he has personal grouse of losing that litigation. CA having been given a number the previous week must have been the first to meet, but was made to wait for 3 hours before he was called for.

  1. AIBE itself violates fundamental right. Our courts have not been dynamic, listening with heart and alleviating the pains of lakhs of students. Cases are not being heard with urgency and decisions are not pronounced on writ. Unwillingness to consider trampling of fundamental right is obvious from remarks of judges who heard cases.
  2. BCI did not pronounce end to end change in rules, and make provision for enrolment without practice, wherein persons need not surrender his other vocations, till he is allowed to practice
  3. Bar council of state does not use principles of natural justice and enrol without asking them to stand on the street without work
  4. Bar councils in violation of Art14 asks for affidavit of no other income only from persons above 40 years of age, whereas all advocates are not to have income, otherwise.
  5. Misuse of power to personal vested interests are on the rise and high, as there is no punishment for such violation

It is surprising, a country wherein citizens cough up money and go to prison for small traffic violaiton and contractual obligation breach (in violation of human rights enactments and pacts), Constitutional Rights and upholding Justice as in preamble goes unpunished.

Is this the Justice referred to in the Preamble?

What is the solution?

Why can't Courts take Constitutional right serious and punish violators?

The amount of  gross violations are in such high, a person can only be standing in court after court his entire life yet his cases will not be over.

Have we established a democracy or demonocracy?

reverred brethern - I request you to give action oriented programs apart from your considered views.





 3 Replies

Isaac Gabriel (Advocate)     25 September 2010

An IAS officer is permitted to carryon his medical profession and attend surgeries at hospitals so as to keep track of his expertise. Viewed in this angle, it is unjust to prohibit the lawyers from attending the other fields where they have talent in addition  professional experience in law.

1 Like

Adv.Aiyer VLV (Proprietor)     25 September 2010

Thanks Mr. Issac

True, whatever reason decades back on different outlook they implemented, people do not look back and correct. 

but here the situation is further worse, they misuse power as there is no accountability and even normal enrolment is in question. The body higher up agrees it is not correct to prevent the enrolment and it was wrong to ask surrender the certificate till advocacy practice is allowed. 

But, what happens to the damage to the person and how cooly the culprits go scot free? 

what can we do about it?


SANJEEV KUMAR (STUDENT)     13 July 2011


under which section of Advocate Act or BCI rules the bar council can refuse the enrolment and practice of law when other professionls are eligible for enrolment and practice of law in courts.

I have gone through the Advocate act/BCI rule but failed to get the relevant section for denial of enrolment in BCI of other professional


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register