A Bench led by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court on Wednesday heard arguments challenging the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) rules governing eligibility to practise before different courts, including the requirement of an All India Bar Examination (AIBE) certificate and minimum years of practice for appearances before High Courts and the Supreme Court.

During the hearing, counsel drew the Court’s attention to Rules 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3 of the BCI notification, which prescribe tiered eligibility for advocates: two years of experience to appear before High Courts and three years for the Supreme Court, subject to certification. Counsel also pointed out that several advocates including those appearing for the Union of India continue to appear provisionally without clearing the AIBE, citing examples from the enrolment list placed before the Court.

The Bench questioned whether the absence of a screening or selection mechanism for government panel appointments, coupled with large numbers of provisionally enrolled advocates, created inconsistencies in the implementation of BCI rules. The Court also referred to the Supreme Court’s guidance in Office of the Advocate General, Punjab, which emphasises the need for an assessment-based process for appointments.

The Court granted time to the ASG to obtain instructions and examine whether Rule 25 or any part of the BCI framework is creating operational difficulties.

The matter will be listed again next Thursday, with the Court indicating that it may consider amendments or clarifications if required after reviewing the instructions and supplementary documents.

Appearances: 

Chetan Sharma, ASG alongwith Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, Central Government Standing Counsel appeared for Union