The Supreme Court of India has taken a significant step towards enhancing legal education by directing State Bar Councils to comply with Rule 26 of Schedule III to the Rules of Legal Education, 2008. This rule places an obligation on the State Bar Councils to prepare a district-wise list of Senior Advocates with a minimum of ten years of experience who are willing to mentor law students during vacation periods through internships.

The directive was issued by a bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta on January 16, in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by Neeraj Salodkar. The petitioner had previously sought information through a right to information (RTI) application regarding the list of senior advocates under the 2008 Rules. The Central Information Commission (CIC) had reprimanded the Bar Council of India (BCI) in June 2022 for not providing a satisfactory response to the RTI application.

Rule 26 of Schedule III to the Rules of Legal Education, 2008, mandates State Bar Councils to compile a list of experienced Senior Advocates willing to take law students for internships during court holidays. This rule aims to bridge the gap between theoretical legal education and practical experience, providing students with the opportunity to learn from seasoned professionals.

The recent order by the Supreme Court instructs State Bar Councils to file status reports within six weeks, detailing their compliance with Rule 26. The court emphasized the responsibility of the Bar Council of India (BCI) to publish the lists of suggested senior counsel prepared by State Bar Councils, making them available on their website and with educational institutions.

The Central Information Commission (CIC) had previously directed the BCI to implement Rule 26 and publish and periodically update the lists on their website. The commission expressed dissatisfaction with the BCI's failure to implement the rule, stating that it rendered the provision inconsequential.

During the hearing, the BCI's counsel assured the court that the list of senior advocates willing to guide students under internships was being prepared. The court's order came after Neeraj Salodkar moved the Supreme Court due to the non-compliance of the BCI with the CIC directive.

Case: Neeraj Salodkar vs Bar Council of India and ors,

Writ Petition (Civil) No. 698/2022.

Click to Read/Download order.