- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
All India Lawyers’ Association for Justice Demands Uniform Fees of Rs. 750 to BCI & BCD
All India Lawyers’ Association for Justice Demands Uniform Fees of Rs. 750 to BCI & BCD
The All-India Lawyers’ Association for Justice (AILAJ) has written an open letter to the chairperson of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and Bar Council of Delhi urging a reduction in the ‘prohibitively high’ enrolment fees borne by young law graduates.
AILAJ is an organization of lawyers, legal professionals and law students striving to protect the core tenets of India’s Constitution, particularly liberty, equality, justice and fraternity.
In the letter the Association has prompted to take measures to limit the enrollment fees charged by State Bar Councils to Rs. 750 until a final decision is reached by the Courts. AILAJ argued that these exorbitant fees act as a hindrance for students from marginalized communities who aspire to enter the legal profession.
According to the letter, the legal profession is an integral part of the Indian justice system. It has a vital role in upholding the rule of law and the pursuit of justice. Despite its importance, the legal profession is not immune to issues of inequality and discrimination that exist in our society.
The open letter by AILAJ states, “There are serious hurdles faced by members of historically marginalised communities, particularly Dalits and Adivasis, and women, as also those from minority and economically weaker sections, to enter, progress and succeed in this profession. One such hurdle is the prohibitively expensive enrolment fees imposed by the state Bar councils.”
The letter cited the Supreme Court’s decision in BCI vs. Bonnie Foi Law College, where it upheld the validity of the All-India Bar Examination (AIBE) but expressed concern over the lack of uniformity in enrolment fees. The Court highlighted the need for the Bar Council of India to ensure a uniform pattern and prevent the fees from becoming oppressive for young students entering the legal profession.
The letter also refers the recent case of The Bar Council of Kerala vs. Akshai M. Sivan, where the Kerala High Court directed the Bar Council of Kerala to collect only Rs. 750 as the enrolment fee from law graduates. Similar cases are pending in different High Courts, such as Odisha and Bombay.
Additionally, the letter highlighted the recent Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed before the Supreme Court in the case of Gaurav Kumar vs. Union of India, challenging the exorbitant enrolment fees charged by State Bar Councils.
AILAJ argues that charging fees above the prescribed amount under section 24(1)(f) is a violation of the right to equality and equal treatment before the law, as guaranteed to law students and graduates under Article 14.
Thus, the AILAJ has requested the BCI to take immediate steps to ensure that all state Bar councils limit the enrolment fees to Rs. 750 until the Apex Court takes a final decision on the matter.