Plea in Telangana High Court against BCI's ₹3,500 fee for All India Bar Exam

The Telangana High Court is slated to hear a plea challenging the ₹3,500 fee charged by Bar Council of India (BCI) to register for the 19th edition of the All India Bar Examination (AIBE)..The petition against such registration fees for AIBE-XXIX (₹3,500 for general candidates) has been filed by a lawyer, advocate Vijay GopalGopal has contended that imposing a separate fee for a mandatory exam like the AIBE - over and above enrollment fees collected by State Bar Councils under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961 - violates the Supreme Court's judgment in Gaurav Kumar vs Union of India.The Court has sought the BCI's response in the matter. The matter has been listed for further hearing on November 27 before Justice B Vijaysen Reddy..The petitioner contends that since AIBE is a mandatory requirement for practicing law, the fee charged by the BCI must comply with the limits set by the Supreme Court in the Gaurav Kumar judgment. In the Gaurav Kumar judgment, the top court had ruled that enrolment fees charged by State Bar Councils and the BCI cannot exceed the limits prescribed by the Advocates Act in Section 24(1)(f). This provision lays down a ₹750 enrolment fee for general category candidates and ₹125 fee for Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribe candidates.The petitioner has argued that after the Supreme Court struck down the imposition of excessive enrolment fees, the BCI cannot charge a ₹3,500 fee to write a mandatory exam like the AIBE. "Charging a fee that is 400% higher for AIBE-19 is arbitrary, unconstitutional, and violates my rights under Article 14. When the enrollment fee is set at INR 750, the AIBE-19 exam fee of INR 3,500 is unjustifiable without any legislative basis to support it," the plea said..Plea in Telangana High Court seeks timely enrolment of advocates by State Bar Council.The petitioner has, therefore, urged the Court to declare that the ₹3,500 AIBE registration fee is arbitrary and to restrain the BCI from collecting such a fee. The petitioner has also called for a refund of any such amount collected already. Additionally, the petitioner has also called on the Court to direct that the BCI cannot outsource its statutory functions to third-party agencies without legal authorization..[Read Order]