Read Time: 04 minutes

A Supreme Court bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh yesterday dismissed plea by a 52 year old man, which states that he is working as an executive engineer in Central Public Works Department (CPWD) and has challenged Clause 28 of Rules of Legal Education, 2008 according to which, candidates belonging to General category who have attained the age of more than 30 years, are barred from pursuing legal education.

The petitioner had initially approached the Competition Commission of India (CCI) stating that the Bar Council of India, by misusing its dominant power has allegedly imposed maximum age restrictions upon the new entrants to enter into the legal education and thus, created indirect barriers to the new entrants in the profession of legal service. He further submitted before the CCI that by having done so, the BCI has also allegedly indulged in colourable exercise of power.

Before the CCI, the petitioner submitted that the members of the BCI, by way of Clause 28, conspired to reduce the competition to its electors and created indirect barriers in the profession of legal service. He further submitted that the members of the BCI who are managing its affairs are misusing the dominant position enjoyed by it in controlling the legal education in India.

The CCI had held that when the BCI appears to be discharging its regulatory functions, it cannot be said to be an ‘enterprise’ within the meaning of Section 2(h) of the Act and consequently, the allegations made in relation to discharge of such functions which appears to be non-economic in nature, does not merit an examination.

When the plea came up for hearing before the court today, the judges while dismissing the plea opined that that they are inclined to dismiss the appeal since the point in question cannot be challenged in the competition jurisdiction and an appropriate representation should be made to the BCI in the regard.

Case title: Raveendra Babu Vs CCI