This is how the Madras HC’s Kirubakaran J plans to save the legal profession

Justice N Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court yesterday directed that appropriate action be taken against the alarming number of unverified advocates found to be practicing in the Madras Bar..In light of various submissions made, he has also ordered that members who are occupying posts in ad hoc Committees of the State Bar Council should step down before they contest for future elections, in compliance with Supreme Court directives..Justice Kirubakaran had taken up the matter concerning the proliferation of unruly advocates while hearing a case concerning a dispute between old and new trustees of the Annai Medical college..While passing the order, the Kirubakaran J noted that it is only a negligible number of advocates who are engaged in such behavior. However, given that this number is increasing by the day, “the time has come to save the advocates who are wedded to the profession.”.On the last date of hearing, the judge had sought to get to the root of the problem. To this end, he had framed 25 questions regarding how such elements enter the Bar and what can be done to prevent the same. The Bar Council of India (BCI), the Tamil Nadu State Bar Council, the Union and state law ministries, as well as the Director General of Police were impleaded in the matter..The Court heard submissions made by Advocate General Vijay Narayan, who was assisted by Public Prosecutor C Emilias. Senior Advocate S Prabakaran appeared for BCI, while Senior Advocate R Singaravelan represented the State Bar Council. Senior Advocate G Thilagavathi made submissions on behalf of Madras University..Faulty Process of Verification should be corrected.The Advocate General had brought to the notice of the Court that following enquiry, it was found that at least 42 persons enrolled had not submitted any of their verification documents or even an address..When notice was issued, only two persons came forward. Out of this, one was found to have enrolled fraudulently in 1998, after which he enrolled himself again in 2014. The other said that he had all the required certificates, but had not submitted them. Taking note of these submissions, Justice Kirubakaran had remarked yesterday,.“There is something rotten in the process itself.”.In his order, he has observed,.“Persons who have not even passed 6th or 7th and 10th standards are able to procure open university M.A., degrees and subsequently, the said degrees have been made use to get admissions into law colleges and obtain law degrees.”.Such practice, the judge observed, was in violation of Rule 2 of the UGC Regulations and the Legal Education Rules, 2008. Further, the High Court had clearly prohibited enrollment of open university degree holders in the case of K Sakthi Rani v Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu. .Despite this, it was found that as many as 713 persons with MAs from open Universities were allowed to enroll by the Bar Council between the years 2009 and 2016. The Court indicated that appropriate action should be taken at the earliest against such persons..“It is open to the Advocate General who is the ex-officio Chairman to issue notice to those 713 candidates regarding cancellation. It is also open to the Bar Council to take any action, including the filing of police complaints against 42 persons who enrolled without documents.”.The Court also noted that Bar Council elections can only take place after thorough verification..“Taking into consideration, the number of unruly elements who had already entered the profession and creating problems, the verification, as ordered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as per Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 has to be completed to weed out the unruly elements and fake lawyers. After thorough verification only, the election could be conducted by the Bar Council. Then only the election would be fair.”.The verification of basic degrees and school certificates is yet to be completed. It was submitted that Madras University is in the process of verifying certificates dating back to 1975. Senior Advocate Thilagavathi submitted that a special team had been appointed to expedite the process..Members of Ad Hoc Committees to step down before contesting future elections.After the terms of members elected to the Tamil Nadu Bar Council had come to an end in 2016, the administration was being taken care of by a special committee constituted under Section 8A of the Advocates Act and ad hoc committees constituted under Rule 32 of the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015..However, it was brought to the attention of the Court that the elected members whose term was already over are occupying posts as the members of the ad hoc Committee and that they intend to contest the election. This was being done in violation of the Supreme Court directive in Ajayinder Sangwan v Bar Council of Delhi and other, where it was held that if any of the committee member intends to contest the election, he or she will have to step down from the committee and the Bar Council of India will appoint the members as per rules..Accordingly, Justice Kirubakaran directed,.“the members who are constituting the committees and intend to contest the election will have to step down. The said contention of the counsels cannot be ignored and therefore, these abovesaid issues have to be taken into consideration by the Bar Council of India and acted upon.”.Read copy of the Order below..Image taken from here..Click here to download the Bar & Bench Android App