M.Santhosh Antony Vareed v. The RegistrarTamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University"Poompozhil"No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran SalaiChennai – 600 028

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATE: 09.09.2009CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARANW.P.No.14877 of 2009 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2009 M.Santhosh Antony Vareed ..Petitioner Vs.The RegistrarTamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University"Poompozhil"No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran SalaiChennai – 600 028. ..RespondentWrit petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus in the form ofthe writ to call for the records connected with the prospectus issuedfor the 3 year B.L. Degree Course 2009-2010 column 2 (iii) issued bythe respondent and quash the same and consequently direct therespondent accept the petitioner's application for 3 year B.L. Courseadmission with relaxing the instructions specified in Column No.2(iii) and to condone the excess 8 days.For Petitioner : Mr.S.IlamvaludhiFor Respondent: Mr.RamakannanORDER The writ petition has been filed challenging the prospectusissued for 3 year B.L. Degree Course 2009-2010 issued by therespondent and to quash the same and consequently for a direction tothe respondent to accept the petitioner's application for 3 year B.L.Course admission by relaxing the instructions specified in ColumnNo.2 (iii) and to condone the excess 8 days.2. The case of the petitioner is that he applied for B.L.Degree Course in the year 2008 and he was selected. Though the orderof selection was communicated to the residential address of thepetitioner and the same was received by his neighbour when he was out https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of station. By that time when he got the communication and went toLaw University, some other candidate already joined the course. 3. The petitioner states that when he applied for Law Collegeadmission for the year 2009-2010, he was surprised to see thecondition in Column No.2 prescribing the age limit for joining LawCollege. As per Column 2 (iii) of the notification/instruction, acandidate should not have completed 30 years of Age as on 1st June2009 (i.e., the candidate must have born on or after 01.06.1979)whereas the petitioner was born on 23.05.1979. Because the petitionerwas overaged by 8 days over and above the age limit, he misses hischance to apply for the Law course. Hence the petitioner has comebefore this Court challenging the age limit fixed in the prospectus.4. Bar council of India, after many deliberations with viewto enhance the quality of Law Education and also to streamline theprocedure for admission, brought out changes. One of such conditionsis fixing of age limit for getting admission into Law College. LegalEducation has to be raised in standard on par with other professionalcourses like Engineering and Medicine. Changes in the admissionprocedure have been done in a proper manner and fixing of age limitis a welcome one. After noting many loop holes in the procedure,which was in vogue till last year, the changes have been brought andthey have been notified by Bar Council of India. 5. Paragraph 3 of the counter affidavit filed by therespondent reads as follows:"I submit, with regard to para 8 & 9 itis stated in the prospectus for admission in to 3year B.L. Degree Course, 2009-2010 under para 2(iii) that "A candidate should not have completed30 years of Age as on 1st June 2009, (i.e., thecandidate must have born on or after 01.06.1979).In case of candidates belonging to SC/STcommunities the maximum age limit is 35 years.(i.e., the candidate must have born on or after01.06.1974)"In this regard, I submit that as per the Bar Council of India Rulesunder Par-IV, Para 28(b) it is stated as follows:-" Subject to the condition stipulated bya University, and the general social condition ofthe applicants seeking legal education belatedly,the maximum age for seeking admission into astream of Three Year Bachelor Degree Course inlaw, is limited to thirty years with right of theUniversity to give concession of 5 further yearfor the applicant belonging to SC or ST or any https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ other Backward Community.". This university hasstrictly adhered to the instructions of the BarCouncil of India with regard to age on admissionand other governing matters. The rule of the BarCouncil of India cannot be relaxed by thisrespondent university, since it is the ExecutantAuthority and not the Directing Authority." 6. Bar Council of India made Rules, known as "Rules of LegalEducation-2008, (Part iv)", on standards of legal education andrecognition of degrees in Law for the purpose of enrolment asadvocate and inspection of Universities for recognising its degree inlaw Under Section 7(1) (h) and (i), 24 (1) (c) (iii) and (iii), 49(1) (af), (ag) and (d) of the Advocates Act 1961. The aforesaid ruleswere made by Bar Council of India, which is an expert body, inconsultation with universities and state Bar Councils. Bar councilhas got power and jurisdiction to make rule to maintain standard oflegal education. The Rules were approved and adopted by the BarCouncil of India at its meeting held on 14th September 2008 vide itsresolution No.110 of 2008. The Rules have come into force. 7. Functions of Bar Council of India are stated in Sec 7Advocates Act 1961. Section 7(1)(h) reads as follows:"7. Functions of Bar Council of India:- (1) Thefunctions of the Bar Council of India shall be-(a)(g)(h) to promote legal education and to lay downstandard of such education in constitution with theUniversities in India imparting such education andstate Bar Councils".Section 49 of Advocates Act speaks about general powers of theBar Council of India and Section 49(1)(af) is extracted as follows:"49. General power of the Bar Council of India tomake Rules:– (1) The Bar Council of India may make rulesfor discharging its functions Under this act, and inparticular, such rules may prescribe-(a)(ae) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (af) the minimum qualifications required foradmission to a course of degree in law in any recogniseduniversity.(c)(d) the standards of legal education to beobserved by universities in India and the inspection ofuniversities for that purpose."The above provisions would undoubtedly prove that the Bar Council haspower competence competence and jurisdiction to lay down normsregarding legal education.8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in V.Sudeer Vs. Bar Council ofIndia reported in AIR 1999 SC 1167 while setting aside Bar CouncilRule providing for pre enrolment training and apprenticeship,recognised the role of Bar Council in suggesting ways and means topromote legal education to be imparted by the universities and itspower to lay down the standards of education, syllabi in consultationwith the universities in India and the same are extracted as follows:" It is necessary to note that in the light ofexperience of various Courts in which advocates arepractising since the time the Advocates Act has comeinto force, the Law Commission of India and otherexpert bodies that were entrusted with the task ofsuggesting improvements in the standards of legaleducation and legal practitioners felt it necessary toprovide for compulsory training to young advocatesentering the portals of the Court rooms. Training undersenior advocates with a view to equip them with Courtcraft and to make them future efficient officers of theCourt became a felt need and there cannot be anydispute on this aspect. In fact, the question of makingsome suggestions regarding admission to law Colleges,syllabus, training, period of practice at differentlevels of Courts etc., was taken up as Item No.16 inthe last Conference of the Chief Justices held inDecember, 1993. The conference resolved that Hon'blethe Chief Justice of India be requested to constitute aCommittee consisting of Hon'ble Mr.Justice A.M.Ahmadias its Chairman, and two other members to be nominatedby Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India to suggestappropriate steps to be taken in matter so that the lawgraduates may acquire sufficient experience before theybecome entitled to practice in the Courts. The saidHigh Power Committee, after inviting the views of theChief Justices and State Bar Councils as well as theBar Council of India made valuable suggestions. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ It is true that these suggestions of the HighPower Committee clearly highlighted the crying need forimproving the standards of legal education and therequirements for new entrants to the legal professionof being equipped with adequate professional skill andexpertise. There also cannot be any dispute on thisaspect. However, as the saying goes "a right thing mustbe done in the right manner". We appreciate thelaudable object with which the Bar Council of India hasframed the impugned rules for providing training to theyoung entrants to the profession by laying down detailsas to how they should get appropriate training duringtheir formative years at the Bar."9. In Inamdar vahat Vs. Symbosis Society's Law Collegereported in AIR 1984 Bombay 451, the Bombay High Court held thatrules framed by Bar Council of India prescribing minimumqualification for admission to a degree course in law in anyuniversity cannot be said to be arbitrary. The Gujarat High Court inJayesh Hema chandra Belsare Vs. Registrar, BhavaNagar Universityreported in 1986 G.L.H 949 held that university has to implement thenorms laid down by the Bar Council of India which is empowered tomake rules relating to standards of legal education.10. A Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court inPreeti Srinvastava (Dr) vs. State of Madya Pradesh reported in 1999(7) SCC 120 has held that regulation of admission has a direct impacton the maintenance of standards of education and further held thatwhile considering the standards of education in any college orinstitution, the calibre of students who are admitted to thatinstitution cannot be ignored. In Veterinary Council of India vs.Indian Council of Agriculture Research reported in 2000 (1) SCC 750it was held that Vetenary Council of India is competent and empoweredto prescribe standards of Vetenary Education which includes power toregulate admission to the course. Similarly Bar Council of India iscompetent to prescribe standards including age limit and it has beenbrought only to maintain "standards of legal education"11. In view of the above, the relief sought for by thepetitioner cannot be granted and the writ petition is liable to bedismissed. Moreover there is no provision in the rules for condoningthe age limit. Any academic course requires age limit for gettingadmission. Young mind can be moulded where as matured mind cannot bemoulded very easily. Fixing of age limit for admission would bringuniformity among the students. Apart from that, it would change theposition that any body and every body at any age could join lawcollege. As stated earlier, the procedure has been changed only forenhancing the quality of legal education after much deliberations andconsultation with the Universities and State Bar Councils. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

12. In view of the reasonings given above, the writ petitionis liable to be dismissed. Mr.S.Ilamvaludhi, learned counsel for thepetitioner seeks leave of this Court to file a representation to theTamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University submitting his grievances andthe same may be directed to be disposed by the respondent. 13. Hence the petitioner is directed to submit arepresentation furnishing the details of grievance within one weekand the Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University is at liberty todispose of the same in accordance with law within two weeksthereafter. 14. Dr.C.Radhakrishnan, the first vice-president of RepublicIndia said:"Our Colleges of law donot hold a place ofhigh esteem either at home or abroad, nor has lawbecome an arena of profound scholarship andenlightened research".Things have not changed sofar and no serious thought has beengiven to enhance the legal education in our Country. Time has come torevamp and upgrade the entire legal education. Fixing Age limit isthe first step in the right direction. Only when right and brightstudents are admitted in the law colleges, standard and talentedpeople would come out of the law colleges and they alone can playimportant role in protecting Rule of Law, democracy andadministration of Justice. 15. Law colleges are like nurseries where the right seeds arerequired to be sown so that what is sown would be harvested. If theinput is not appropriate the out come will not be good. Those who areadmitted in the law colleges are going to be responsible for rule oflaw and administration of justice in this country. It is better thatthe antecedents of those who seek law admission are looked into, asthere is likelihood of unruly elements getting into profession andlikelihood of shielding their nefarious activities by law degrees.Law degrees should not land in the hands of those elements and itwould further dilute the standards in the profession finally. TheHon'ble Supreme Court in Satish Kumar Sharma v. The Bar Council ofHimachal Pradesh, reported in AIR 2001 SC 509 emphasised the need forpreserving clean and sufficient bar in the country and the same readsas follows:"The profession of law is called a nobleprofession. It does not remain noble merely by calling itas such unless there is a continued, corresponding andexpected performance of a noble profession. Its nobilityhas to be preserved,protected and promoted. Aninstitution cannot survive in its name or on its past https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ glory alone. The glory and greatness of an institutiondepends on its continued and meaningful performance withgrace and dignity. The profession of law being noble andhonourable one, it has to continue its meaningful, usefuland purposeful performance inspired by and keeping inview the high and rich, traditions consistent with itsgrace, dignity, utility and prestige. Hence theprovisions of the Act and Rules made thereunder interalia aimed at to achieve the same ought to be giveneffect to in their true spirit and letter to maintainclean and efficient Bar in the country to serve cause ofjustice which again is noble one."16.Great leaders like Mahatma Gandhi, Dr.B.R.Ambedkar,Rajaji, Motilal Nehru were lawyers and most of the policy makers inmost of the countries continue to be lawyers. Hence it is time totake steps to restore past glory of the legal profession in ourcountry and it should commence from the admission of students in lawcolleges and it has rightly commenced by the new rule.17. The role of Bar council in standardising the legaleducation is very important and it has to constantly watch andregulate functioning of law colleges and revise the curriculam as andwhen necessary. To keep pace with globalisation, the curriculum oflegal education requires to be constantly reviewed to suit thepresent day situation in such a way that talented students areattracted to law colleges and it would alone would prevent/restrictdetoriation of standards in legal education and profession andprevent recurrence of November 2008 violent incidents in law collegeleading to constitution of Justice Shanmugam Commission. If the legaleducation is not corrected with appropriate remedial measures, thejustice delivery system in this country would suffer irreparably andthat is not good for largest democracy of the world.18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in R.K.Anand Vs. Registrar,Delhi High Court reported in 2009(6) SCJ 465 spoke about theresponsibility of Bar Council in the administration of Justice. Theright first step has been taken by the Bar Council by prescribing agelimit for legal education and more steps are expected in the interestof the society at large.STANDARD AND QUALITY LEGAL EDUCATION IS THE REQUIREMENT OF OURCONSTITUTION19.Chapter IV of Part V of the Constitution of Indiadeals with "The Union of Judiciary" which contains Articles 124 to147; Chapter V of Part VI of the Constitution describes about "TheHigh Courts in the States" which contains Articles 214 to 231;Chapter VI of Part VII deals with "Sub-Ordinate Courts" whichcontains Articles 233 to 237. Article 76 speaks about appointment and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ powers of "Attorney General of India" and his right is given inArticle 88. Similarly "Advocate General's" appointment andfunctions are given in Article 177. The common thing in the aforesaidarticles is that the persons who are to be appointed in "UnionJudiciary", "High Court", "Sub-Ordinate Court", "Attorney General"and "Advocate General" are Advocates. No other profession exceptlegal profession has been recognised by the Constitution. Theappointments for the aforesaid coveted posts are made from lawyers.Hence requirement of Constitution is "Standard quality LegalEducation" which alone can produce competent Advocates who couldoccupy the constitutional posts to act as per constitutional mandate.Then only the scheme of the constitution will be fulfilled byappointing competent, qualified, capable and proper Advocates todischarge the constitutional functions as stated in the aboveArticles.20. This Court feels that, the new bar council rule is awelcome step to enhance the standard and quality of the legaleducation. In western countries, the rank holders/higher mark holdersare opting for Law Colleges first like medical colleges in ourcountry. The legal education has to be made meaningful. WilliamWordsworth wrote: "Child is the Father of Man". Likewise, law studentis the future of Legal profession, Judiciary and Rule of Law. Henceutmost care has to be given to legal education which was hithertoneglected. Legal education requires to be made on par with the otherprofessional courses. The following suggestions are made regardingquality law education and the Government and Bar Council of India maytake note of the suggestions:a) The classes in law colleges have to be conducted like aregular college on the line of National Law School and the attendancehas to be made mandatory where as law classes are taught like parttime course in shifts and in a few colleges, this court understandsthat attendance is not a must. b) College hours have to be increased from 4 hours to 5 hoursor 6 hours and having classes in morning as well as afternoon so thatthe students would get stuck to their studies.c) Higher marks like minimum 60% marks may be prescribed forgetting admission into law colleges so that comparatively morecompetent, bright and intelligent students would join the course andit would enhance the quality and competence in the legal profession.Even if all the seats in the law colleges are not filled up by fixinghigher marks, those seats need not be filled up with students withlesser marks. This would enable the law colleges to get credibleimage. d) As stated earlier the antecedents of the students, ifnecessary, may be verified before admitting them into law course. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ e) Appointment of competent full time professors/lecturers isto be made.f) Appropriate infrastructure like proper libraries have to beprovided and those colleges which do not have proper infrastructureand provide quality education should be closed down and new collegesneed not be opened considering availability of long number ofadvocates and Law Colleges.g) Three year law course has to be scrapped in a phased manneras five year integrated course was introduced to replace three yearcourse.h) Standardising legal education, in keeping pace withglobalisation and new trends and challenges in the field by updatingthe syllabus is essential.i) Jurists like Judges of Supreme Court, High Court, SeniorAdvocates, Academicians have to be involved in legal education byinvolving them in making syllabus and to contribute by way oflectures, seminars workshop etc. j) Ethical and moral values have to taught as subjects andhave to be inculcated in their minds, as they are necessary andessential for legal profession inevitably.k) Law students have to be involved in field study like courtvisit, social services, Legal Workshop so that they could interactwith masses.l) Police officials can also be associated with legaleducation by inviting them to give lectures on investigation andprosecution in criminal cases. The interaction between police and lawstudents prevent or bring down the clashes between the lawyers andpolice in future.21. With the above observations/suggestions, the writ petitionis disposed of. No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneouspetitions are closed.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.Registrarps https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To1. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University, "Poompozhil", No.5, Dr.D.G.S.Dhinakaran Salai, Chennai – 600 028.2. The Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Law, Shastri Bhavan (Law and Justice), New Delhi.3. The Bar Council of India, New Delhi.4. The Bar Council of TamilNadu, High Court Buildings, Madras – 600 104.+ 1 c.c. to Mr. S. Ilamvaludhi, Advocate. S.R.No.45614.W.P.No.14877 of 2009KA (CO)GSK 16.11.2009.