The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Friday informed the Supreme Court that it has passed a resolution to lift upper age limits prescribed for admission to law courses [Rishabh Duggal & Anr. v. Bar Council of India & Anr.].
The submission was made before a Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana.
"The Bar Council of India has withdrawn the age restriction. A resolution was passed yesterday," the BCI's counsel informed the Court today.
This submission was taken on record, before the Court closed a plea challenging such age restrictions for law school admissions.
The BCI's Rules of Legal Education, 2008 had prescribed an upper age limit of 20 years for general-category candidates seeking admission to five-year integrated law courses, with a five-year relaxation for certain reserved categories. The rules also prescribed a 30-year upper limit for the three-year law course, with a similar relaxation.
The age restrictions have since been the subject of litigation for several years.
The BCI had earlier withdrawn Clause 28 of Schedule III of its 2008 Rules (the provision prescribing the age limit) in 2013, after a one-man committee found that the restriction violated Article 14 (equality before law).
However, after subsequent litigation, the BCI revived the age restrictions through a September 2016 circular.
The validity of the restrictions has since been challenged before different courts.
The plea before the Supreme Court raised, among other questions, whether the statutory power to regulate legal education and prescribe qualifications can be used by the BCI to impose an upper age limit on admission to law courses.
When the matter was heard in September, the Court had asked the BCI to consider withdrawing the upper age limit prescribed for admission to five-year integrated LL.B.
The BCI, in response, sought some time to examine this issue. Today, the BCI's counsel informed the Court that a resolution was passed on November 5 to withdraw such age restrictions for law courses.
Senior Advocate Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the petitioner, urged the Court record this stance in its order.
"May I request that the last three lines of the (BCI) circular be recorded? Earlier also, the BCI had withdrawn the restriction and subsequently restored it. This time, they have used the expression finally. I would be grateful if that could be recorded," he said.
"The resolution was passed only yesterday. I would have filed it otherwise," the BCI's counsel replied.
The Court proceeded to close the plea after taking the BCI's submission on record.