“Legal Profession is not child’s play”, Madras HC bats for minimum work experience, eligibility test for High Court practice

The Madras High Court has suggested the introduction of minimum experience criteria before fresh law graduates are allowed to practice before the Madras High Court..“The legal profession is not a child’s play,” states the order passed by a Madurai Bench of Justices N Kirubakaran and SS Sundar..The Court observed that owing to inadequate work experience on the part of new entrants to the legal profession, the Court is often left without any assistance while hearing cases. ( Madras High Court).“… a new trend has crept in the legal profession, namely, the Law Graduates after coming out the Law Colleges without any experience in the legal profession, start appearing before the Court without even giving the material details in the affidavit and arguing the matters. As a result, the Court is unable to effectively adjudicate the matters. There is no assistance from those Lawyers.”.To address this issue, the Court opined that fresh advocates must practice for a minimum number of years with a senior practitioner or before the lower courts before they are allowed to appear before the higher judiciary. As noted in the order,.“It requires at least 3 to 5 years experience in Senior’s office, so that, they will be able to know from the Seniors as to what are all the particulars to be collected from the parties, how a petition/plaint should be drafted and what are all the things to be omitted and how the case should be presented before the Court and how the queries raised by the Court could be answered by the Advocate. .Though they have the fundamental knowledge, without the basic procedures followed by the Trial Courts, they venture into the legal profession, which makes very difficult for the Courts to render justice effectively….…the Bar Council has to take steps to prescribe at least 3 years experience in the trial Courts to qualify the Advocates to appear before the Madras High Court and 5 years of experience in the High Courts for appearing before the Supreme Court or otherwise, the procedures at no point of time would be learned by the Advocates.”.On the tendency of fresh law graduates to opt for practice before the higher judiciary directly, the Court also remarked,.“There is a misconception amongst some of the young Advocates that practice in High Court and Supreme Court would give status and money without gaining any experience from the trial Court. The trial Court experience cannot be obtained anywhere from the Constitutional Courts…the Bar Council should also consider this issue also.“.Another proposal made is the introduction of an examination which must be taken before advocates can practice before the Madras High Court. The petitioner in the case, Kannan, had referred to rules framed by the Supreme Court for the conduct of the Advocate-on-Record (AoR) examination to maintain the standard of advocates appearing before the Court..Taking note of this, the Court opined that a similar exercise should be carried out before allowing advocates to practice before the Madras High Court as well. Justice Kirubakaran noted that there were sufficient powers conferred upon the High Court to prescribe such minimum eligibility rules..“This Court has got power under Article 225 and 226 of the Constitution of India, apart from Section 34 of the Advocates Act to frame such Rules, like, the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Only those who are qualified in the examination to be conducted by the High Court as per the proposed new Rules, the Supreme Court Rules, 2013, the Advocates with sound knowledge in law would be made as Advocate on Record. This exercise will enable the Court to get good assistance from the Advocates on Record and it is necessary to use the judicial time qualitatively.”.Before parting with the interim order, it was also emphasised that these standards are being suggested with the intention of safeguarding the rights of litigants. Kirubakaran J clarified that the proposals made were not intended to be against any particular section of lawyers. (Madras High Court).“The rights of the parties get affected once and for all as without material details, if the case is presented, it will only invite an order of dismissal from the Court violating their rights ….The rights of the people who are approaching the Advocates, are involved. Therefore, sufficient knowledge and experience are required not only for giving legal advice, but also for filing and presenting the case before the Court, supported by statutes and precedents. We cannot expect everything from the newly enrolled Lawyers, who have just completed the law course. (Madras High Court).…this Court does not mean to underestimate the newly enrolled Advocates. But, at the same time, experience is required, so that, the clients, as well as the Advocates and the Courts, would be benefitted. To put it in other words, by doing so, justice delivery system is safe-guarded…”.After issuing notice, the matter has been posted to be taken up for further consideration on April 10..Read the Order:.Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.