Will Take Decision on Revising Enrollment Fee After Meeting of State Bar Councils For Unifying Fees: Bar Council of Kerala Informs High Court
The Bar Council of Kerala on Thursday informed the High Court that the matter of revising the enrollment fee was being considered by it and that the Bar Council of India had convened a meeting of all state bar councils, on the direction of the Supreme Court, for fixing a uniform fee for enrollment across India. A division bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma...
The Bar Council of Kerala on Thursday informed the High Court that the matter of revising the enrollment fee was being considered by it and that the Bar Council of India had convened a meeting of all state bar councils, on the direction of the Supreme Court, for fixing a uniform fee for enrollment across India.
A division bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen was hearing the appeal filed by the Bar Council of Kerala (BCK) against the interim order of a single judge which directed the BCK to not collect more than Rs 750 as enrollment fees from prospective advocates who had petitioned the Court.
When the matter came up for hearing, the counsel for one of the petitioners Adv. Santhosh Mathew submitted before the court that the enrollment applications of the petitioners were yet to be confirmed for the upcoming enrollment on 19th March 2023 and that such confirmation was being denied only because they had approached the court challenging the enrollment fee.
The counsel appearing for the Bar Council of Kerala Senior Adv. G Shrikumar told the court that all the petitioners who had challenged the enrollment fee levied by it, and by an order of the single judge, were directed to pay only Rs. 750/- as enrollment fee shall be allowed to apply and to enroll. The court recorded this submission of the counsel for BCK:
“Learned Senior counsel appearing for the Bar Council submits that all of the applicants on payment of Rs.750/- will be allowed to enrol subject to the final decision of the matter by this Court in appropriate time.”
Adv. Maitreyi Hedge, appearing for one of the petitioners also submitted that the guest passes for the applicants could be issued only on confirmation of enrollment and that Thursday was the last day for applicants to pay for the guest passes. She stated that if the enrollment of the petitioners were not confirmed on time, the petitioners would not be able to purchase guest passes for their parents. She submitted that only because the petitioners had challenged the fee, they were being denied the opportunity to purchase guest passes, that was being handed out to other applicants. To this, the counsel for the BCK orally submitted that every applicant will also be given guest passes if applied for.
In light of the meeting proposed to be convened by the Bar Council of India, the court adjourned the matter.
“It is also submitted that pursuant to the direction of the Apex Court, the Bar Council of India is to convene a meeting for fixing a uniform fee for enrolment applicable to all Bar Councils in India. It is submitted that Bar Council of Kerala also will attend the meeting to be convened and take appropriate decision thereafter. In the light of the subsequent event as above, we adjourn the matter.” the court recorded in its order.
On Friday, the counsel for the petitioners brought to the notice of the court that the petitioners had been asked to appear before the Enrollment Committee on Saturday, despite already having completed the physical verification of their certificates. The counsel for BCK clarified that this was being done so that the declaration forms are signed in advance by the advocates to be enrolled. About 1500 students are being enrolled on Sunday and it is avoid the practical difficulty of having each and everyone sign their forms so that the enrollment certificates can be issued, that some applicants are being called a day in advance, the BCK submitted.
The BCK has filed the appeal challenging the order of the single judge restricting the enrollment fee to Rs. 750/- contending that said interim order had far reaching and debilitating effects, on the functioning of the BCK as a regulatory body and in particular on the functioning of the BCK in enrolling eligible persons as advocates on its rolls.
The Bar Council had stated in its petition that the judgment of the High Court in Koshy T. v. Bar Council of Kerala, Ernakulam and Another (2017 KHC 553), based on which the single bench had passed the order was meant to be applied in a different context. The BCK argued that the said decision only curtails the powers of the Bar Council in imposing a `"Special Fee" for candidates enrolling as advocates after retirement from service on attaining superannuation. This decision does not in anyway restrict the power of the BCK in imposing conditions for enrolment under Section 28 (2) (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, it averred.
A single bench of Justice Shaji P Chaly had previously passed an interim order in view of the decision of the High Court in Koshy T. v. Bar Council of Kerala referred above, which had held that without being conferred any specific power under the statue, the Bar Council is not entitled to collect fee other than a fee of Rs.750/- prescribed under law.
“when this specific question was considered by this Court in Koshy T. (supra), which has become conclusive and final, it may not be appropriate on my part to direct the petitioners to pay the entire amount claimed by the Bar Council and receive applications for enrollment", the single bench had stated in its order.
The petitioners had challenged the exorbitant fee of Rs. 15,900/- being levied by the Kerala Bar Council on the ground that an enrolment fees of Rs. 750/- has been imposed under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates’ Act. Any rule passed by Bar Council of Kerala, giving itself the authority to levy a higher charge is beyond the scope of its powers, the petitioners had argued.
Case Title: The Bar Council Of Kerala Vs Akshai M. Sivan and Connected Cases