BALDEV RAJ SHARMA versus BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [1989] 2 S.C.R. 862 · Decided: 01-05-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.S. PATHAK · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
BALDEV RAJ SHARMA 
v. 
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ORS. 
MAY 1, 1989 
B 
[R.S. PATHAK, CJ AND M.N. VENKATACHALIAH, J.] 
c 
Advocates Act, 1961: s. 24(1)(c)/Bar Council of India Rules, 
1975, Part IV: Rule J(I)(c}-Advocate--Enro/ment jor--Qualification 
necessary-Three years' course of study in law pursued by maintaining • 
regular attendance. 
Sub-clause (iii) of cl. (c) of s. 24(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961 
entitles a person to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll if he has 
obtained a degree in law after 12th March, 1967 after undergoing three 
years' of study in law. Under sub-cl. (iiia) of cl. (c) a person is 
considered qualified for 1)dmission as an advocate if he bas obtained a 
D 
degree in law after under~oing a course the duration of which is not less 
than two academic years commencing from the academic year 1967-68 
or any earlier academic year. Rule l(l)(c) of Part IV of the Bar Council 
of India Rules, 1975 requires that the course of study in law should 
have been by regular attendance for the requisite number of lectures, 
tutorials and moot courts and practical training. 
E 
The petitioner had obtained his Bachelor of Laws (Academic) 
degree in 1980 as a private candidate. He then pursued the third year of 
law as a regular student from the Kanpur University and obtained the 
professional degree in 1982. Thereafter, he applied to the State Bar 
Council of Punjab and Haryana for enrolment as an advocate under the 
F 
Act. The State Bar Council denied enrolment on the ground that he had 
not fulfilled the conditions laid down in Rule l(l)(c) of the Rules. 
Dismissing the writ petition, 
HELD: A candidate desiring enrolment as an advocate under the 
G 
Advocates Act, 1961 must fulfil the conditions mentioned in 
s. 24(l)(c)(iii) or s. 24(l)(c)(iiia) read with Rule l(l)(c) of the 
Bar Council of India Rules, 1975. In the instant case, the petitioner 
failed to do so. His application for enrolment was, therefore, rightly 
rejected. [866C] 
H 
Sub-clause (iii) of s. 24(l)(c) when read along with Rule l(l)(c) 
862 
•
-f 
,-. 
--'~· 
' " 
-i 
BALDEVRAJ SHARMA v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA [PATHAK, CJ.[ 
863 
)._ intends that the three years' course of study in law must be pursued by 
maintaining regular attendance. So also, in a case falling under sub-cl. 
(iiia) of s. 24(l)(c) a course of study in law must be pursued for not less 
than two academic years and. Rule l(l)(c) will apply to such a case also.· 
The petitioner .had passed his two year's law course as a private candi-
date and the third year law only by regular attendance. He was, there-
_..,/, 
fore, not entitled to be enrolled as an 'advocate. [865H-866A, 864E] 
f/ 
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Civil Writ Petition ]'; 
747of1985. 
(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India). 
S. R. Rangarajan and K.B. Rohtagi for the Petitioner. 
Manoj Swamp and Miss Lalita Kohli Advocates for the 
Respondents. 
\ 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PATHAK, CJ. This writ petition under Article 32 of the 
Constitution has been filed by Baldev Raj° Sharma against an order of 
.J-
the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana rejecting his application for 
enrolment as an advocate. 
_.., 
On 4 March, 1972 the petitioner passed the Bachelor of Arts 
examination from the Pu.njabi University, Patiala. In 1978 he jpined 
the Bachelor of Laws (Academic) course in Kurukshetra Universit-y. 
The course is of two years' duration. The petitioner completed the 
course and on 1 January, 1981 he was awarded the degree of Bachelor 
of Laws (Academic) by the Kurukshetra University. During the year 
1981 the petitioner joined the LL.B. (Professional) course in the third 
year in Kanpur University as. a regular student. The Kanpur University 
confers two distinct degrees, LL.B. (General), which is a two year 
course, and LL.B. (Professional), which is a three year course. A 
person who has been awarded the LL.B. (General) degree is ~ligibl,e 
for admission to the LL.B. (Professional) third year. The petitioner 
says that there is no distinction in the Rules and Regulations of the 
Kanpur University on whether LL.B. (General) course should be 
pursued by regular attendance or as a non-collegiate student. It is 
urged that the LL.B. degree of the Kanpur University is recognised by 
the Bar Council of India for the purpose of enrolment as an advocate. 
The petitioner attended classes as a regular student of the LLB. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
864 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1989] 2 S .
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.