Advocates In Jobs Unconnected To Legal Matters Have To Reappear For AIBE After Five Years, BCI Tells SC

The Bar Council of India (BCI) apprised the Supreme Court that it has resolved to make it mandatory for those who have cleared the All India Bar Exam (AIBE), but have since been involved in non-judicial/ legal work, to re-appear for the examination if they stay out of law practice for more than 5 years.

In an additional affidavit submitted before the apex court on July 29, the BCI stated that it has resolved that if a person takes up a job having no connection with legal or judicial matters, then such person will have to reappear for AIBE, if he/ she wants to get his licence to practice renewed after remaining in such job for more than 5 years from the date of publication of result of the AIBE.

"Meaning thereby that a person after passing the AIBE, if he/ she remains in some service/job/employment not connected with any legal or any judiciary matter, he/ she shall be required to appear and clear the AIBE again after 5 years of publication of results of AIBE," the affidavit stated.

The affidavit was filed pursuant to an order passed by the top court on April 21 in a case filed by Advocate Durga Dutt concerning maintenance of standards of legal profession and legal education.

The affidavit also stated that a committee, entrusted to oversee the selection of the agency to conduct the bar exam, will look into steps to make it more analytical than rote-memory based.

"The said committee shall examine how the exam process can be one to test the skill and knowledge of a practitioner of law in a better manner not based on rote ability but on an analytical thinking process," it was submitted.

The Bar Council had filed an affidavit in April stating that it is forming a high-powered committee to look into the queries of the Supreme Court despite maintaining that other occupations are not allowed to be practiced after enrollment to ensure they do not avail the benefits of an advocate.

The affidavit further said that other details with regards to the issues under consideration, including the constitution of various committees to look into legal education and the state of the profession, will be handed over to the Court during the next hearing in a sealed cover.

On holding of AIBE, the BCI submitted that it has decided to re-constitute the Monitoring Committee for the exam.

Two judges who are member trustees of BCI Trust was entrusted with the responsibility of nominating a former Supreme Court judge who would then select an agency to hold the AIBE.

Pursuant to that, a retired Supreme Court judge has already been nominated who will be the chairperson of the Monitoring Committee.

The names of the judge and other members of the committee will be submitted in a sealed cover, it was stated.

Regarding inspection of law colleges, the BCI said that surprise inspections will be carried out in law institutions under the chairpersonship of retired judges and Senior Advocates, with the Council having already written to Chief Justices in this regard.

"The Council has constituted a central monitoring committee for surprise inspection. The names of the members of the committee shall be placed before the Court in a sealed cover," it was submitted.

The visiting team for surprise inspection will consist of one former judge of the High Court, one teacher of law, one teacher of non-law subjects, one member of the State Bar Council or any Senior Advocate of advocate having at least 25 years practice at the Bar.

Thought the BCI has written to the High Courts to forward names of retired judges who can lead the teams for surprise inspections, only a few High Courts have responded to the BCI's request, it was submitted.

Interestingly, the affidavit said that the BCI had requested Senior Advocate KV Viswanathan to be a part of either the Legal Education Committee of the BCI or the Monitoring Committee for the AIBE, but he refused citing the pendency of the present case before the top court.

However, since the case is not a personal litigation but is only aimed at improving the standards of legal profession, the BCI does not find any harm in Viswanathan becoming a part of the monitoring committee, the affidavit said.

Towards placements of junior advocates with seniors at the top court, the Council stated it has resolved to write to all Senior Advocates towards the same. Similarly, State Bar Councils will also write to seniors in their High Courts and district courts for employing and mentoring junior counsel.

Seniors in this case need not have 25 years of experience if competent ones without that much experience are found who are willing to accommodate junior counsel. Further, the office-bearers of the Council will write to the Supreme Court Bar Association for placement of fresh law graduates.

For qualifying for placements, law students will have to sit for objective-based online tests based on subjects taught.