Advocate Act, 1961-Sections 24 & 49(1)-Bar Council of India Rules-Rule 9-Validity of-Enrolment as an advocate-Entry of persons who complete age of 45 years barred-Whether Rule 9 is valid-Held, No-Rule struck down as ultra vires the Act-Rule is discriminatory.

Constitution of India-Art. 14--Bar Council of India Rules-Rule 9-Validity of-Entry of persons who completed the age of 45 years as advocates barred-Whether Rule 9 is reasonable-Held, No-Rule violates principle of equality.

Writ petitions were filed challenging the legality and validity of Rule 9 added by the Bar Council of India by resolution No. 64/93 dated 22nd August, 1993 in Chapter 111 of Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules. The newly added rule barred the entry of persons who had completed the age of 45 years on the date of application for enrolment as an advocate from being enrolled as such by the concerned State Bar Council. Petitioners challenged the rule as inconsistent with Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution and section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

The Bar Council of India contended that it had acted bonafide within the framework of the Act and the Constitution. According to it the right to practise as an advocate not being a fundamental right but only a privilege conferred by the Act could always be withdrawn and in any case reasonable restrictions could be imposed. It was alleged that the restriction imposed by the newly added rule was to serve a public purpose and could never be termed as unreasonable, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Since the upper age limit had been fixed to save the legal profession from decay and deterioration it could not be said to be inconsistent with Articles 21 and 14 of the Constitution. According to the respondent Bar Council of India a person who had already spent the best years of his life in pursuing some other profession or occupation could not be said to have the correct aptitude of a service oriented professional and could not be expected to maintain the high standard of professional conduct. It was submitted that persons who retire from various government, semi-government and other institutions when admitted to the legal profession use their earlier contacts to convass for cases and such behaviour leaves a lingering effect on the profession. Such persons being not inspired by lofty ideals of the profession, their only motive being money-making for which they are prepared to stoop to any level.