Read Time: 05 minutes

A Supreme Court bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundaresh will examine the validity of judgment of Gujarat High Court which allows lawyers with other employment to enrol as advocates without having to resign their job.

The bench while declining to stay the judgment of the High Court agreed to consider the issue in detail. The bench also appointed K.V.Vishwanathan, Senior Advocate, as the amicus curiae in the matter.

The bench prior to the hearing observed that the view of the High Court cannot be faulted since the issue has a wider ramification. The bench further observed that though the petition by Bar Council pertains to the judgment of the Gujarat
High Court, the court expressed its intention to examine the issue.

Justice Kaul further observed that the objection of the Bar Council is that a lawyer should not carry out any business while they are enrolled and that some lawyers may have a license, the license maybe suspended is they take up a job. However in the present case, the respondent has offered to resign their employment if they are allowed to sit for the bar exam and clear the same. The Bar however feels that she should resign in order to take the exams.

S.N.Bhat, advocate, appearing for the Bar Council of India submitted that there is a qualitative distinction in a member who has already been admitted. He further submitted that there is also a rule that a training had to be completed. Bhat further said that the apprehension of the Bar council is that it will become difficult to monitor the candidates under such circumstance.

On hearing the arguments, the bench adjourned the matter to January 25th 2022 for further consideration.

The Gujarat High Court in its judgment had observed that making resignation as a precondition to appear for the bar examination was too harsh. The High Court while nothing that the person seeking relief before it was a single mother who sought to become an advocate observed that should the candidate give up her job and if she fails the bar examination, her livelihood will be affected.

Case title: Bar Council of India Vs Twinkle Rahul Mangaonkar.