Supreme Court seeks BCI Chairman's assistance to examine compliance with order capping enrolment fees

The Supreme Court on July 15 asked Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman and Senior Advocate Manan Kumar Mishra to assist the Court in examining whether State Bar Councils have complied with its 2024 ruling that prohibits charging enrolment fees beyond the statutory cap under the Advocates Act, 1961 [KLJA Kiran Babu vs. Karnataka State Bar Council]..A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan was hearing a contempt petition filed in person by one KLJA Kiran Babu, who alleged that several State Bar Councils are continuing to demand exorbitant fees from young lawyers in violation of the top court’s ruling in Gaurav Kumar v Union of India.While the Court stopped short of issuing notice on the contempt plea, it called upon the BCI Chairman to appear before it and explain the present position.“We are not inclined to issue notice, however, we would like to know from the Bar Council of India whether the directions issued in the main judgment i.e. para 109 are being complied with in their letter and spirit or not. We request Mr. Manan Mishra, the learned counsel, who also happens to be the Chairman of the Bar Council of India to appear in this matter and assist us,” the Bench noted in the order. .The contempt plea was filed pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision of July 30, 2024, in which the top court had held that the Bar Councils cannot unilaterally fix or escalate enrolment fees. The Court had specifically held that State Bar Councils are bound by the provisions of Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, which limits the enrolment fee to ₹750 for general category candidates and ₹125 for Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe candidates. .The Court had also found that additional charges imposed by State Bar Councils during enrolment - often amounting to several thousands of rupees - violated the constitutional rights of law graduates.The July 2024 ruling made it clear that its directions would apply prospectively and that no refunds would be required for excess fees collected in the past. However, it emphasised that all State Bar Councils and the BCI are duty-bound to follow the law strictly moving forward..Despite this, many Bar Councils continue to flout these directions, the petitioner claimed in the contempt plea.When asked by the Court to clarify how he was personally aggrieved by the alleged non-compliance, the petitioner responded that any individual may move the Court in contempt for breach of its orders.Choosing not to delve into that question, the Bench deferred the issue and sought an update directly from the BCI. “We request Mr. Manan Mishra, the learned counsel, who also happens to be the Chairman of the Bar Council of India to appear in this matter and assist us,” the Court said..Earlier this year, the BCI had moved an application before the Supreme Court in the Gaurav Kumar case seeking permission to enhance the enrolment fee to ₹25,000. That application is still pending..The present contempt proceedings will now continue on August 4, with the BCI Chairman expected to clarify whether the Court’s directions are being followed in letter and spirit..[Read Order]