This document is an order from the Madras High Court regarding a petition filed about guidelines for enrolling law graduates from other states to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu. The order notes examples provided of candidates enrolled despite criminal cases, misrepresentations, or violating age limit rules for law college admission. It directs the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu to investigate such violations in other enrollments, suspend candidates if needed, and remove them after inquiry if warranted based on the powers granted to Bar Councils in the Advocates Act and Legal Education Rules.

1. Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
(Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)
Monday, the Third day of February Two Thousand Fourteen
Present
The Hon’ble Mr.JusticeK.Kirubakaran
WP(MD) No.10315 of 2013
….Petitioner
V.Ramesh
Vs
1. The Chief Secretary
Government of Tamilnadu,
2. The Law Secretary,
Government of Tamilnadu,
3. The Chairman,
Tamilnadu Bar Council,
4. The Union of India
5. The Secretary, Law & Justice, Union Of India
6. The Bar Council of India
7. The Law Commission of India
8. The University Grants Commission

2. 9. The Tamilnadu and Puducherry Bar Federation
10.MMBA
11.MBHAA
12.Madras Bar Association
13.Madras High Court Advocates Association
14.Women Lawyers Association
15.Madurai Bar Association
16.The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh
17.The Bar Council of Karnataka
18.The Chief Secretary to Govt. Of Andrapradesh
19.The Chief Secretary to Govt. Of Karnataka
20.The Director General of Police, Tamilnadu
21.A.Jegan, Madurai
22.V.Santhanam, Madurai
23.Mr.Thiyagarajan, President of MAHAA, Madurai.
24.Dr.Ambetkar Law College, Renigunta.
25.MAHAS
26.All India Lawyers Union

3. 27.R27
28.The Registrar General, Madras High Court
29.R.Esthov Antony Ashok, Madurai
30.The CBI, Chennai
31.Dr.Ambetkar Law University, Chennai
32.The Registrar, Andhra University, Visakapatnam
33.The Registrar, Venkateswara University, Tirupathi.
34.The Registrar, Dr.B.R.Ambetkar University, Andrapradesh
35.The Registrar, DahodaramEanhivayar National Law University,
Vishagapatnam
36.The Registrar, AcharayaNagarjuna University, Andrapradesh
37.The Registrar, StiKrishnadevaraya University, Anantapur
38.The Registrar, Sri Padmavathymahila University, Andrapradesh
39.The Registrar, Chattisgarh University, Chattisgarh
40.The Registrar, University of Mysore, Mysore
41.The Registrar, University of Pune, Pune
42.The Registrar, Andhra University Andrapradesh
43.The Registrar,Getim University Visakapatnam

4. 44.The Registrar, Gulbarga University, Gulbarga
45.The Registrar, Karnatak University, Dharwad
46.The Registrar, Karnataka State Law University, Hubli
47.The Registrar, Kuvempu University, Shimoga
48.The Registrar, Mangalore University, Mangalore
Petition praying that on the circumstances stated therein and
in the affidavit filed therewith the High court will be pleased to issue a
writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction
in the nature of writ directing the 3rd Respondent to frame appropriate
guidelines as enshrined in this affidavit and those which may be
framed by this Honble Court by considering the representation of the
petitioner dated 03.04.2013, before enrolling candidate law graduating
from other states, before the 3rd Respondent herein.
ORDER : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the
petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the
arguments of M/S W.PETER RAMESH KUMAR, Advocate for the
petitioner the court made the following order :During the hearing, it is brought to the notice of this court that the
Bar Council Of India, in some cases, enrolled the persons
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
Who got admissions and completed Law course in
contravention of Rule 28 (Rule relating ceiling on age of the
students for admission);
Misrepresentation to the Bar Council;
Suppression of criminal cases;
Violation of undertaking given before the Bar Council of
TamilNadu.

5. 2. A few examples have been given by Mr.PeterRameshkumar which are
as follows:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
Karmegam, whose enrolment No. is 1319/2013 against whom a
criminal case has been pending in F.I.R. No. 78 of 2010; central
crime Branch, Madurai and said fact was suppressed by the said
candidate in the undertaking given in the application for
entolment
Pandikamatchi’s enrolment No. is 1933/2013 and date of birth
is 09.05.1969 and he got admissison into Law college on
14.07.2006 in violation of Rule 28 of the Legal Education
Rules; and
Joseph Arul Jayaseelan’s enrolment No. id 1305/2013 and date
of birth is 31.05.1973 and was detained under GOONDAS ACT
and he is a history sheeter also.
3. In the enrolment form itself there is a column with regard to the
undertaking which reads as follows:
“N.B: SECTION 26(1) OF THE ADVOCATES ACT, 1961
PROVIDES THAT BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA MAY IF SATISFIED
EITHER OF PREFERENCE MADE TO IT IN THIS BEHALF OF
OTHERWISE THAT ANY PERSON HAS GOT HIS NAME ENTERED
ON THE ROLL OF ADVOCATES BY MISREPRESENTATION AS
TO AN ESSENTIAL FACT OR BY FRAUD OR UNDUE INFLUENCE
REMOVE THE NAME OF SUCH PERSON FROM THE ROLL OF
ADVOCATES AFTER GIVING HIM AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING
HEARD”
And below the aforesaid undertaking only the applicant affixes his/her
signature, If any violation of undertaking is found and any fraudulent
representation has been made and that by the enrolment was made and the
law admission and degree have been obtained in contraventrion of Rule
28, the Bar council of Tamil Nadu has got all the powers to remove the
said candidate from the enrolment list, after giving opportunity to him, As

6. an interim measure the Bar council of Tamil Nadu shall take initiate
action against those persons, who are found to be guilt of those violations.
4. Section 24 of the Advocates Act 1961 speaks about the persons, who
may be admitted as Advocates on a State roll, which reads as follows:
24. Persons who may be admitted as advocates on a State
roll.— (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, and the rules
made thereunder, a person shall be qualified to be admitted as
an advocate on a State roll, if he fulfills the following conditions,
namely:—
(a) he is a citizen of India:
Provided that subject to the other provisions contained
in this Act, a national of any other country may be admitted as
an advocate on a State roll, if citizens of India, duly qualified, are
permitted to practise law in that other country;
(b) he has completed the age of twenty-one years;
(c) he has obtained a degree in law—
(i) before the 3[12th day of March, 1967], from any
University in the territory of India; or
(ii) before the 15th August, 1947, from any University in
any area which was comprised before that date within India as
defined by the Government of India Act, 1935; or
1[(iii) after the 12th day of March, 1967, save as
provided in sub-clause (iiia), after undergoing a three year course
of study in law from any University in India which is recognised
for the purposes of this Act by the Bar Council of India; or
(iiia) after undergoing a course of study in law, the
duration of which is not less than two academic years
commencing from the academic year 1967-68 or any earlier
academic year from any University in India which is recognised

7. for the purposes of this Act by the Bar Council of India; or]
2[(iv) in any other case, from any University outside the
territory of India, if the degree is recognised for the purposes of
this Act by the Bar Council of India] or;
3[he is barrister and is called to the Bar on or before
the 31st day of December, 1976 4[or has passed the article clerks
examination or any other examination specified by the High
Court at Bombay or Calcutta for enrolment as an attorney of that
High Court;] or has obtained such other foreign qualification in
law as is recognised by the Bar Council of India for the purpose
of admission as an advocate under this Act;]
5[***]
(e) he fulfils such other conditions as may be specified in the
rules made by the State Bar Council under this Chapter;
6[(f) he has paid, in respect of the enrolment, stamp duty, if
any, chargeable under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899),
and an enrolment fee payable to the State Bar Council of 7[six
hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of India, one hundred
and fifty rupees by way of a bank draft drawn in favour of that
Council]:
Provided that where such person is a member of the
Schedule Castes or the Schedule Tribes and produces a certificate
to that effect from such authority as may be
prescribed, the enrolment fee payable by him to the Sttate Bar
Council shall be 1[one hundred rupees and to the Bar Council of
India, twenty-five rupees].
2[Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, a person
shall be deemed to have obtained a degree in law from a
University in India on that date on which the results of the
examination for that degree are published by the University on its
notice board or otherwise declaring him to have passed that
examination.]
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), 3[a
vakil or a pleader who is a law graduate] may be admitted as an
advocate on a State roll, if he—

8. (a) makes an application for such enrolment in accordance
with the provisions of this Act, not later than two years from the
appointed day, and
(b) fulfils the conditions specified in clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f)
of sub-section (1).
4[(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) a
person who—
(a) 5[***] has, for at least three years, been a vakil or pleader
or a mukhtar, or, was entitled at any time to be enrolled under
any law 6[***] as an advocate of a High Court (including a High
Court of a former Part B State) or of a Court of Judicial
Commissioner in any Union territory; or
7[(aa) before the Ist day of December, 1961, was entitled
otherwise than as an advocate practise the profession of law
(whether by of pleading or acting or both) by virtue of the
provision of any law, or who would have been so entitled had he
not been in public service on the said date; or]
1[***]
(c) before the 1st day of April, 1937, has been an advocate of
any High Court in any area which was comprised within Burma
as defined in the Government of India Act, 1935; or
(d) is entitled to be enrolled as an advocate under any rule
made by the Bar Council of India in this behalf,
may be admitted as an advocate on a State roll if he—
(i) makes an application for such enrolment in accordance
with the provisions of this Act; and
(ii) fulfils the condittions specified in clauses (a), (b), (e) and (f)
of sub-section (1).]
5. Though the learned counsel for the Bar council of Tamil Nadu
expressed some doubts regarding the power to suspend and to cancel the
enrolment, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu which enrolled the candidates,
has got all powers to suspend and cancel the enrolment, if there is

9. violation. By the same provision, the Bar Council has got incidental,
auxiliary and implied powers to suspend and cancel the enrolment in the
case of violation or misconduct. Even if it is not provided under the Act,
by virtue of Section 16 of the General Clauses Act, the Bar Council of
Tamil Nadu has got power.
6. If any Rules are framed by the Bar Council of India, the same is
binding on the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and other States. One sush
Rule is Rule 28 of Legal Education with regard to ceiling on age of the
candidates to get admission into Law College. Those candidates who got
admission in violation of any of the Rules including Rule 28 of Legal
Education are not entitled to get enrolment. If anybody got already
enrolled, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has got power to take action
including suspension and to remove as per law.
7. In view of that, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu is directed to find out
the violations in the matter of enrolment of candidates including those
above three candidates and similarly placed persons and the candidates,
who got admissions into Law college after June 2009 and take
appropriate action including suspension first and to remove then after
enquiry.
-End-