Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.

com)

W.P.Nos.25215, 26085, 26177 and 26556 of 2017

N.KIRUBAKARAN, J

Though the original writ petition is relating to a Medical College namely,

Annai Medical College and Hospital and the writ petition is filed by the affected

students, the founder trustees and the new trustees, due to their inter se disputes,

allegedly engaged advocates either to retain possession or to take possession. In

this regard, the Superintendent of Police, Kancheepuram District also filed an

affidavit, which confirmed the engaging of advocates by both the parties to take

over the college or to retain the college.

2.Taking note of similar incidents occurring in various places by the so-

called advocates, this Court incidentally decided to deal with the said issue in the

Public Interest as this case would expose the unruly behaviour of some of the

persons called advocates and the necessity to control them and to root out the

criminal elements from the legal profession. Therefore, this Court by the detailed

interim order dated 10.10.2017 impleaded Bar Council of India; Bar Council of

Tamil Nadu; Government of India represented by Secretary, Ministry of Law and

Justice; Law Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu; Director General of Police and

other authorities and raised about 25 queries regarding the unruly behaviour of the

so-called advocates and the actions of the some of the leaders of the Bar and the

mushrooming of law colleges and the necessity to control the number of law

colleges and entry of criminal elements and streamline the legal education.
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

3.Those queries were raised by this Court only on the basis of erudite,

trend changing and encyclopedic judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court authored by

Hon'ble Mr.Justice Anil R.Dave, as he then was, in the case of Mahipal Singh

Rana v. State of U.P reported in 2016 (8) Supreme Court Cases 335 on the

lawyers and their role in the Courts and in the Society and regulation of legal

profession. In the judgment, the Hon'ble Judge referred to almost all the earlier

judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the timely articles written by various

jurists in the popular Law Journals and the news dailies. Among the various

observations made by the Hon'ble Judge, the observations made by him at

Paragraphs 36 and 37 of the above judgment are relevant for the purpose of this

order and hence, they are reproduced below:-

36. We may also refer to certain articles on the subject. In Raising the

Bar for the Legal Profession published in the Hindu newspaper dated 15th

September, 2012, Dr. N.R.Madhava Menon wrote:

..Being a private monopoly, the profession is organised like a

pyramid in which the top 20 per cent command 80 per cent of paying
work, the middle 30 per cent managing to survive by catering to the
needs of the middle class and government litigation, while the
bottom 50 per cent barely survive with legal aid cases and cases
managed through undesirable and exploitative methods! Given the
poor quality of legal education in the majority of the so-called law
colleges (over a thousand of them working in small towns and
panchayats without infrastructure and competent faculty), what
happened with uncontrolled expansion was the overcrowding of ill-
equipped lawyers in the bottom 50 per cent of the profession
fighting for a piece of the cake. In the process, being too numerous,
the middle and the bottom segments got elected to professional
bodies which controlled the management of the entire profession.
The so-called leaders of the profession who have abundant work,
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

unlimited money, respect and influence did not bother to look into
what was happening to the profession and allowed it to go its way
of inefficiency, strikes, boycotts and public ridicule. This is the
tragedy of the Indian Bar today which had otherwise a noble
tradition of being in the forefront of the freedom struggle and
maintaining the rule of law and civil liberties even in difficult
times.

37. In Browbeating, prerogative of lawyers, published in the Hindu

newspaper dated 7th June, 2016, Shri S. Prabhakaran, Co-Chairman
of Bar Council of India and Senior Advocate, in response to another
Article Do not browbeat lawyers, published in the said newspaper
on June 03, 2016, writes :

The next argument advanced against the rules is that the

threat of action for browbeating the judges is intended to silence
the lawyers. But the authors have forgotten very conveniently that
(i) when rallies and processions were taken out inside court halls
obstructing the proceedings,

(ii) when courts were boycotted for all and sundry reasons in
violation of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ex-Capt.
Harish Uppal, (iii) when two instances of murder of very notorious
lawyers inside the Egmore court complex took place on the eve of
elections to the Bar Associations, (iv) when a lady litigant who came
to the Family Court in Chennai was physically assaulted by a group of
lawyers who also coerced the police to register a complaint against
the victim, (v) when a group of lawyers barged into the chamber of a
magistrate in Puducherry and wrongfully confined him till he
released a lawyer on his own bond in a criminal complaint of sexual
assault filed by a lady, (vi) when a group of lawyers gheraoed a
magistrate for not granting bail and one of them spat on his face,
leading to strong protests by the Association of Judicial Officers, and
(vii) when very recently, a lady litigant was physically assaulted by a
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

group of lawyers for sitting in the chair intended for lawyers inside
the court hall, lawyers such as the authors of the article under
response maintained a stoic silence.

Even lawyers who claim to be human rights activists choose to be

silent when the human rights of millions of litigants are affected by
boycott of courts. It shows that some lawyers, like the authors of the
article under response, have always maintained silence and do not
mind being silenced by a few unruly members of the Bar who go on
the rampage at times. But they do not want to be silenced by any
rule prescribing a decent code of conduct in court halls. The raison
d'tre appears to be that browbeating is the prerogative of the
lawyers and it shall be allowed with impunity.

In Paragraph 52 of the judgment, the Hon'ble Apex Court requested

the law commission to make recommendation for regulation of legal
profession. Paragraphs 50 to 52 of the said judgment is usefully
extracted hereunder:
50.While this appeal will stand disposed of in the manner
indicated above, we do feel it necessary to say something further in
continuation of repeated observations earlier made by this Court
referred to above. Legal profession being the most important
component of justice delivery system, it must continue to perform
its significant role and regulatory mechanism and should not be seen
to be wanting in taking prompt action against any malpractice. We
have noticed the inaction of the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh as well
as the Bar Council of India inspite of direction in the impugned order
of the High Court and inspite of notice to the Bar Council of India by
this Court. We have also noticed the failure of all concerned to
advert to the observations made by the Gujarat High Court 33 years
ago. Thus there appears to be urgent need to review the provisions
of the Advocates Act dealing with regulatory mechanism for the
legal profession and other incidental issues, in consultation with all
concerned.
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

51. In a recent judgment of this Court in Modern Dental College and

Research Centre versus State of M.P. in Civil Appeal No.4060 of 2009
dated 2nd May, 2016, while directing review of regulatory
mechanism for the medical profession, this court observed that
there is need to review of the regulatory mechanism of the other
professions as well. The relevant observations are:

There is perhaps urgent need to review the regulatory mechanism

for other service oriented professions also. We do hope this issue
will receive attention of concerned authorities, including the Law
Commission, in due course.

52. In view of above, we request the Law Commission of India to go

into all relevant aspects relating to regulation of legal profession in
consultation with all concerned at an early date. We hope the
Government of India will consider taking further appropriate steps in
the light of report of the Law Commission within six months
thereafter. The Central Government may file an appropriate
affidavit in this regard within one month after expiry of one year

The welcome development is that the Bar Council of India now has got much
needed, able and timely guidance of Hon'ble Mr.Justice Anil R.Dave as the
Chairman of the Central Verification Committee today, who has authored
the above judgment.

4.While so, when the matter was taken up for hearing on

25.10.2017, it is submitted by Mr.Vijay Narayan, learned Advocate General
that 42 persons got enrolled as lawyers without furnishing any basic
documents and without even providing any addresses. Though notice were
given to them through online, only two people replied and one of the
person is even found to be enrolled twice; Persons who have not even
passed 6th or 7th and 10th standards were able to procure open university
M.A., degrees and subsequently, the said degrees have been made use to
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

obtain law degrees. Based on the same, they started enrolling those degrees
which are obtained in violation of the UGC Regulations, 1985 and contrary
to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Annamalai
University Vs. Secretary to Government and others reported in (2009) 4
SCC 590.

5.The verification of the basic degrees and school certificates are

under the process and there are difficulties in getting them verified within a

short time. Taking into consideration, the number of unruly elements who

had already entered into the profession fraudulently 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 genuine advocates list could be

prepared and election could be conducted by the Bar Council. Then only the

election would be fair.

6.That apart, the term of the elected members of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu

came to end on 19th April 2016 and there is a special committee constituted under

Section 8A of the Advocates Act, 1961 with the learned Advocate General as Ex-

officio Chairman and two other members. Other adhoc committees have been

constituted under Rule 32 of Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice

(Verification) Rules, 2015 which speaks about the power of Bar Council of India to

form adhoc committees consisting of the elected members of the State Bar Council

till the election is over. However, it is represented by all the counsels that the

elected members whose term was already over are occupying as the members of

the adhoc committee and they intend to contest the election. The Hon'ble
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

Supreme Court in Ajayinder Sangwan v. Bar Council of Delhi and other, by an

order dated 02.05.2017 directed 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.

7.Pursuant to the said order, it is represented the members of the

committee had resigned from office and a new committee was constituted under

Section 8A of the Advocates Act, 1961 with the learned Advocate General as Ex-

officio Chairman and two other members viz., Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior

Counsel and Mr.Chandrasekaran, learned counsel.

8.When the matter is called today, Mr.S.Prabhakaran, learned Senior

Counsel appearing on behalf of the Bar Council of India produced a communication

dated 02.11.2017 addressed to Bar Council of Tamil Nadu stating that a special

committee with the following members viz., Mr.R.Singaravelan, Senior Advocate;

Mr.S.Silambanan, Senior Advocate; Mr.N.Chandra Sekharan, Advocate; Mr.N.Rajan,

Advocate and Mrs.Narmada Sampath, Advocate has been constituted towards

expeditious execution of preparation of list of voters so that the process of

preparation of electoral roll could be expedited.

9.Further, it is represented by Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned Senior Counsel

who is also a member of the committee constituted under Section 8A of the

Advocates Act, 1961 and Mr.S.Prabhakaran, learned Senior Counsel appearing on

behalf of the Bar Council of India that there is a serious threat to the safety of the

Bar Council premises, since verification of certificates of all the enrolled advocates
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

are being undertaken in the said premises, as the persons with fake educational

certificates and fraudulent law degrees and criminal background are afraid that

they would be exposed if the verification of all certificates is done. Therefore,

they are trying to block the verification by force. That apart, it is represented that

Mr.C.Rajakumar, Secretary of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and

Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Co-Chairman of the Bar Council of India are being threatened

with dire consequences and their safety as well as the safety of their family

members including their children is in question. The complaint produced by one of

the chamber assistants and whatsapp messages sent to Mr.S.Prabhakaran's mobile

number were produced before me by the learned Senior Counsel

Mr.R.Singaravelan. On perusal of the same, it is clear that certain unruly elements

are aiming at him.

10.Since the role of Secretary is very much essential in verifying the

documents of the enrolled advocates and because of the threat already received,

it would be appropriate to direct the police authorities to give armed police

protection to Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Co-Chairman of Bar Council of India and

Mr.C.Rajakumar, Secretary of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. Mr.Arul,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor undertakes to inform the police authorities

with regard to the security to be given to the Bar Council premises and also armed

police protection to Mr.C.Rajakumar, Secretary of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and

Puducherry and additional police protection to Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Co-Chairman of

Bar Council of India.

 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

11.Time and again, this Court has been exposing the serious menace caused

by the persons who purchase law degrees from the letter pad colleges. The persons

who are having criminal background, who do not have basic qualification viz.,

School education as well as the College education were able to produce fabricated

certificates to the letter pad law colleges and were able to procure law degrees

without even attending classes in absentia. This Court would make it clear that

many colleges are run without any infrastructure and conducting classes and those

colleges are selling law degrees to persons with no formal education and also to

persons with criminal background. Those colleges are termed by this Court as

letter pad colleges. This Court does not mean and refer regular law colleges

as letter pad colleges. The number of persons who are getting enrolled before the

Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, after obtaining law degrees from letter pad colleges of

other states are increasing day by day from the year 2000 onwards and the

maximum number of people now enrolling before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu

are the persons who purchased law degrees from letter pad colleges. Those

persons are only conducting Kangaroo Courts Katta Panchayat and involved in

taking possession of properties by force illegally with the help of rowdy elements

and bringing disrepute to the profession. The criminal elements are using their law

degrees from letter pad colleges to shield their criminal activities and to escape

from police. So, their credentials have to be ascertained by verifying the School

Certificates [X Std and XII Std] as well as the degree certificates [Under graduate

degree] which they have relied upon for getting admission in law colleges and for

enrollment, as per Rule 5 of Bar Council of India rules.

 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

12.In a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of P.Ramu v.

The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu reported in (2016) 4 CTC 850, which

judgment was authored by me, it was held that many persons, roaming in the

corridors of the Court, one fine day, take the avatar of an Advocate. This only

proves the fact many Law Colleges are selling Law Degrees to unqualified persons

and it is evident that anybody can procure a law degree, without even attending

classes. Procuring Law Degrees, in absentia, while in service as full-time

Government Servants/Employees, from law Colleges, situated more than 100 kms

away is nothing but fraud.

13.A Division Bench of this court, in M. Vetriselvan v. High Court of

Judicature at Madras reported in 2015 (1) CTC 129 categorically stated that a

serving officer cannot carry on his job and cannot get full time degree and

paragraph No. 54 of the said judgment is extracted as follows:

54. A serving officer cannot, thus, carry on his job and yet have
Degree obtained of a Full Time Degree Course. The two would be
contradictory and would create a doubt on the Degree itself. That
aspect, however, is not under challenge before us and thus, We say
no further, but to observe that while considering for any future
promotions to the post of Assistant Registrar or thereafter, the
B.L/L.L.B Degree holders who may have obtained the same while
being full time Employee's in the High Court would not be entitled to
be categorised as such and at best, can be treated only on
equalterms with the B.A.L Degree holders. The B.L Degree holders,
who are entitled under the relevant Feeder categories subject to
seniority are only the ones who obtained the Degree prior to joining
in service or when the Evening Course was permitted.
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

This kind of procuring Law Degrees, fraudulently, has to be prevented by Bar

Council and action should be taken against those Colleges for selling degrees or

conferring degrees to people, who do not attend the classes. It is a matter to be

pondered over as to whether it would be possible to get B.E Degree or M.B.B.S

Degree in this way.

14.It would also be appropriate to incorporate paragraph 19 of the decision

reported in (2016) 4 CTC 850.

19.Many persons are said to have entered into the profession for
the past 15 years, having obtained degrees fraudulently viz.
procuring Law Degrees, in absentia, in the Institutions, which are
hundreds of kilometers away from their work place, while rendering
service in their organization as full-time employees. Therefore, the
Bar Council of India is directed to verify the details of candidates,
who enrolled, when they crossed 40 years or more, as to whether
they were working at the time of getting Law Degree and if it is
found so, then their enrollment, based on degrees obtained
fraudulently, has to be cancelled. Whenever persons, aged more than
40 years, apply for enrollment, the Bar Council should be careful
enough to get the details of such persons, especially, about the
manner in which they obtained Law Degree and if the law degree
obtained by them, was, in absentia, then they should be refused
enrollment. This will, definitely, go a long way, in improving the
legal system and in preventing half-baked law graduates from
entering into the profession. The Bar Council of India should take
note of the above facts and act accordingly. Their applications for
enrollment should be rejected and the applications should not be
returned, as these candidates would get enrolled from other States.
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

15.As stated above, many persons, irregularly and fraudulently obtain law

degrees while they were full time Government employees/Private employees and

after retirement, they enter the profession. The number of such kind of lawyers

who enroll after retirement with irregular law degrees are increasing. Those

retired employees, with irregular and fraudulent law degrees are causing a threat

to the profession and they become panel counsels of the Corporation, Banks,

Insurance Companies causing dent in the practice of those who are wedded to the

profession by starting their practice immediately after enrollment. Many practicing

advocates are complaining in this regard. Therefore, the verification process

should also include ascertaining whether the law degrees have been obtained

genuinely or fraudulently, while in full time service by verifying their income tax

details, family card etc., It is made clear that those with genuinely obtained law

degrees could practice after their retirement and there is no prohibition for the

same. However, it has to be pondered over whether those who do not have any

connection with Courts, profession and development of law could advice properly

to the clients who avail their services.

16.The persons who enrolled as advocates after procuring law degrees

irregularly, fraudulently by producing fabricated certificates, without having any

formal education could be identified, as they are in large numbers and they are

causing all sorts of problems like doing Katta Panchayat etc., In this regard, this

Court would also like to recall direction (11) of the directions issued by this Court

in paragraph 101 of the judgment in S.N.Anantha Murugan v. Chairman, Bar

Council of India reported in (2015) 6 CTC 22. Direction (11) in paragraph 101 and

paragraph 102 of the above judgment are extracted here under:

 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

101.(1)...
(11).Bar Council of India shall not conduct the next Bar Council

election, after expiry of the present term in 2016, without

prescribing minimum qualification like 20 years standing in the

Bar or a Senior counsel, who does not have any criminal case or

criminal background for the candidates to contest Bar Council

elections and till the verification of advocates is done as per Bar

Council of India Certificate and Place of practice (Verification)

Rules 2015, by entrusting the functions to an expert body.

102.Criminalization of Bar has already started and is spreading like a

wild fire sullying, degrading and destroying the image and prestige
of the noble profession. As a member of the legal fraternity and the
higher judiciary, for the past 30 years, this Court has been
witnessing steep fall in the standards, steady invasion of the
profession by criminal, communal and extremist elements, by
purchasing law degrees without any basic qualifications and without
attendance from Letter Pad Law Colleges and their attempt to
disturb normal Court proceedings by boycotts, exhibition of unruly
high handed behavior inside and outside Court and committing
offences and covering up by advocate's label as explained in detail. It
is very unfortunate that the so-called Bar leaders and many of the
Bar Council members are said to be associated with these elements.
If this menace is not prevented and curtailed, the day is not too far
when Courts will be conducted as per the wishes of criminal
elements and communal leaders ending the rule of law. One needs to
take a look at the grim and serious state of the legal profession
practically. As a member of the legal profession, this Court hopes
that the issue of criminalization of the profession is seriously taken
 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

note of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Central Government

and appropriate action be taken to redeem the profession from the
clutches of persons with criminal background, communal elements
with muscle power, persons with extremist ideology otherwise
NEETHI DEVATHAI (Goddess of Justice) will not forgive all the stake
holders of justice delivery system.

17.When the letter pad law colleges without any infrastructural facilities

which offer law degrees were called upon to verify the genuineness of the degrees

obtained from the said colleges, they would naturally respond stating that those

certificates or degrees are genuine. So, the only way to curb the menace would be

to verify the School certificates or the College certificates produced by the

candidates for joining the law colleges. Therefore, the verification should not be

restricted only to the law degrees alone, but it should be extended to School

certificates viz.,X Std and XII Std certificates as well as under-graduate degree

certificates. Without verification of those certificates, it would not be possible to

verify who are all the persons who are qualified to become lawyers. Unless those

persons are identified and cleaned from the system, it is not possible to have a

clean profession, since the persons who enrolled with purchased law degrees

without any basic education are feared to be outnumbering genuine advocates. If

elections are conducted without verification, only the persons with fake and

irregular degrees and persons with criminal background would dominate the

proposed election. Hence, thorough verification of all certificates is needed.

18.Therefore, the Bar Council of India is directed to place this order before the

Central Verification Committee headed by Hon'ble Mr.Justice Anil R.Dave, Former

Judge, Supreme Court of India for getting appropriate orders/directions, to verify

 Bar & Bench (www.barandbench.com)

school certificates viz., SSLC and Higher Secondary Certificates and basic degrees

and law degrees of the enrolled persons, to weed out,

1. Persons who got enrolled without basic educational qualifications.

2. Persons who enrolled after retirement by obtaining law degrees while in

service fraudulently, in absentia, while working as full time

government/private employees.

3. Persons who enrolled with open university degrees.

4. Persons who enrolled suppressing their criminal background.

19.For further proceedings, list the matter on 17.11.2017.

06.11.2017