Telangana HC to Hear Petition Challenging AIBE Registration Fee

Telangana HC to Hear Petition Challenging AIBE Registration Fee

A petition has been filed in the Telangana High Court challenging the registration fee structure for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) set by the Bar Council of India. 

For AIBE-XXIX, candidates in the general category are required to pay ₹3,500, along with GST of ₹12.60 and a convenience fee of ₹70.

The petitioner, Advocate Vijay Gopal, has cited the recent Supreme Court judgment in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, which ruled that Bar Councils cannot charge more than ₹750 as the enrolment fee for general category candidates.

The petitioner argued that since the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) is a mandatory requirement for practicing law, the fee charged by the Bar Council of India must comply with the limits set by the judgment.

They contended that if the Supreme Court has deemed exorbitant enrolment fees to be violative of the fundamental rights of aspiring advocates, the same principle should apply to the AIBE fee. The petitioner further highlighted that the excessive fee imposes a significant financial burden on candidates who are just starting their legal careers.

The petitioner further contended that the Bar Council of India (BCI), as a delegated authority under the Advocates Act, cannot outsource its statutory functions, including conducting the AIBE, to a third-party agency, as the Act does not permit such sub-delegation. 

Additionally, the petitioner sought clarity on various aspects of the fee structure, including the share of the ₹3,500 fee allocated to the exam conducting agency, the amount retained by the BCI, a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) governing this arrangement, and the process followed to determine the fee. These details have been requested in the petition.

Justice B. Vijaysen Reddy, while hearing the petition for admission, directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to file its response. The court also ordered that the fee paid by the petitioner for the AIBE would be subject to the final outcome of the case.

Case : Vijay Gopal v. Bar Council of India and others | WP 31722/2024

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy