Plea Challenging AIBE Fees : Supreme Court Asks Petitioner To First File Representation Before Bar Council Of India

The Supreme Court today (February 24) heard a petition filed by Advocate, appearing as petitioner-in-person, challenging the fees and other incidental charges of the All India Bar Examination (AIBE). As per the petitioner, the Bar Council of India (BCI) charges Rs.3,500 for the AIBE which in violation of the Supreme Court's judgment in Gaurav Kumar v. UOI (2024).

In Gaurav Kumar's judgment, a three-judge bench headed by former CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra held that the enrolment fee cannot exceed Rs.750 for advocates belonging to the general category and Rs.125 for advocates belonging to SC/ST categories as stated in Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

A bench of Justices Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan after briefly hearing the petitioner, passed an order giving liberty to the petitioner to first make a representation before the BCI. If he does not get a response from the BCI without a reasonable time, he can approach the Court.

At the outset, Justice Pardiwala orally remarked that BCI needs funds from somewhere to continue surviving. He said: "You want the Bar Council to survive or not? We have otherwise also chopped of their both upper limbs and lower limbs. You are referring to my judgment? Now, they are also to survive. They have a staff to maintain. They have to recover something. Once you pay this amount of Rs.3,500, you will start earning 3,50,000. What is the problem in initially paying Rs.3,500 to BCI?"

Justice Pardiwala also questioned why the petitioner invoked Article 32 jurisdiction. He said: "You should have gone to some High Court."

The petitioner responded that the issue pertains to the fundamental rights of young advocates who want to practice but this current fee violates their rights.

The Court therefore ordered: 

"This petition filed in public interest is one relating to the fees of the All India Bar Exams. To be precise, the pray in this writ petition reads as under... The petitioner, a practising Advocate, appearing in person invited the Court's attention to the decision in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India...The petitioner would submit that in view of this decision, the recovery of Rs.3500 plus other incidental charges as a condition precedent for appearing in AIBE is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961. We are of the view that the petitioenr should be bring it to the notice of the Bar Council of India that this amount of Rs.3500 plus incidental charges are violative or rather contrary to the judgment rendered by this Court. It shall be open for the petitioner to prefer an appropriate representation and wait for the response of the BCI. If there is no response without reasonable time, he may come back. Even if there is a negative response, he may come back."

Case Details: SANYAM GANDHI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR|W.P.(C) No. 28/2025 

Click Here To Read/Download Order