DPLB – 1001

LL.B. (Part-I)[First Semester]

Examination 2016
Bar Bench Relation
Professional Ethics and Accountancy for Lawyers
Written Test for Sessional Work
Time 2 Hrs 30 Minutes
Maximum Marks: 40

1. Discuss the constitution and functions of The Bar Council of India.

2. What are the Rights associated with an Advocate ? Explain.

3. Discuss the Duties of an Advocate towards – Another Advocate; Another Client

4. Write short notes on :

 Law Graduate
 Legal Practitioner
 Contempt of Court

5. What provisions have been made under the Indian Advocates Act, 1961 regarding the Dress of
Advocate ? Explain.

6. Choose the correct answer:

1. The term of Office of members of the State Bar Council is:
a. 6 years.
b. 5 years.
c. 3 years.
d. 4 years.
2. The Bar Council of India consists of the following members viz.,
a. The Attorney-General of India, ex-officio.
b. The Solicitor General of India, ex-officio.
c. One member elected by each State Bar Council from among its members.
d. Each one of the above.
3. The Seniority of an Advocate is determined on the basis of:
a. His date of enrolment.
b. His age.
c. His Clienteel.
d. Number of his appearances before High Court.
4. Any person who illegally practices in any Court shall be punished with:
a. Imprisonment which may be extended to 6 months.
 b. Imprisonment which may be extended to 3 months.
c. Imprisonment which may be extended to one month.
d. Fine which may extend to Rs 5,000.
5. An Advocate permitted to:
a. Review parliamentary bills for remuneration.
b. Edit legal text books at a salary.
c. Teach the students and set the examination question papers.
d. All of the above.
6. Any person aggrieved by an order made by disciplinary committee of Bar Council of India may
prefer an appeal before:
a. High Court.
b. Supreme Court.
c. Appellate Committee of The Bar Council of India.
d. No appeal lies.
7. An Advocate has the following duties towards opponent:
a. Not to make allegations against the opponent which do not have the support of
evidence.
b. Not to negotiate in any way on the subject matter on controversy except through the
adversary counsel.
c. Not to use unfair and malicious devices against the opponent.
d. Each one of the above is forbidden.
8. The Bar Council of India enjoys the power of:
a. Revision.
b. Review.
c. Appeal.
d. None of the above.
9. In Public Place other than a Court, an Advocate:
a. Should not wear band or gown.
b. May wear the gown but not the band.
c. May wear the band but not the gown.
d. There is no such restriction.
10. Every Advocate whose name is entered in the State role has a right to practice -
a. In all the Courts including the Supreme Court.
b. Before any tribunal or authority or person legally authorized to take evidence.
c. Both a. and b. are correct.
d. No right vested in an Advocate to practice law.

Write short notes on the salient features of the Indian Advocates Act, 1961
The Indian Advocates Act, 1961 was brought into force to implement all recommendations made by
the All India Bar Committee. The Advocates Act, 1961 has replaced the Indian Bar Councils Act. In
order to implement the recommendations of All India Bar Committee that was endorsed by
fourteenth Report of the Law Commission in 1955, this Advocates Act of 1961 came into existence.
The main objective of this Act is to integrate and constitute one class of legal practitioners called
‘Advocates’. It also aims at prescribing a uniform qualification for the Bar and creating an All India
Bar Council and State Bar Councils.It also gives the rights and duties of an advocate. According to
this act, “An advocate is who has entered any roll under the Advocate’s Act, 1961”. Before this Act,
there were different classes of legal practitioners under the Legal Practitioners Act. They were
Advocates, lawyers, vakils, etc. the Advocates Act has abolished these classes and has recognised
only one class of Advocates. They are then also classified as “Senior Advocates” and “other
advocates” on their merit. The status of a Senior Advocate is granted by the High Court or the
Supreme Court with consent of the advocate. Only an advocate who is enrolled in the "Common
roll" is entitled to practice in the Supreme Court or in any court, tribunal and in any other
body where an advocate can practice. According to this act, advocates have the right to practice
in any court. Under article 32 of this act, the advocate whose name is not registered under the
Advocates Act, can also practice in any court, but only at the discretion of the court.
KEY TAKEAWAYS:
 This provides the laws, rules and frame works related to legal practitioners.
 It aims to bring together only one class of legal practitioners called ‘Advocates’. Advocates
are allowed to practice throughout the state and before all courts and tribunals.
The main features of this act are as follows-
1. This act enabled the establishment of the Bar council of India and State Bar Councils.
2. Any advocate cannot enroll himself/ herself in more than one State Council, though he can
be transferred from one state council to another.
3. The Bar council was given an autonomous stature.
4. It provided for the provisions for similar roll of Advocates throughout the country.
5. It also provided to combine all the laws of the legal system into one.
6. There were various provisions set up for the Bar Council at state and central level.
7. The different titles like lawyer, vakil was scrapped off and a single title of Advocate was
applied.

Below mentioned are the important sections that are reflected in the Advocates Act. Section
2(1) (a): It states that an ‘Advocate’ is any person who has entered under any roll under the
provision of the Advocates Act, 1961. He argues in favour of his clients in court of law. So any
person, who fulfils the conditions required for an admission as an advocate, may be enrolled as an
advocate by the State Bar Council. The conditions that need to be fulfilled for being enrolled as an
Advocate are mentioned under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Section 7: It lays down the various functions, regulatory and mandates of the Bar Council. Mainly it
focuses on providing standards of professional conduct and etiquette foradvocates. It lays down the
procedure to be followed by the disciplinary committees. It safeguards the rights, privileges and
interests of the advocates. Help in promoting and supportinglaw reforms. It encourages legal
education and lay down guidelines for legal education. It carries out seminarson legal topics by
eminentjuristsand publishes the law journals and papers of legal interest. It provides legal aidto the
poor.
Section 9: According to this Section, a Bar Council must consist of one or more Disciplinary
Committees. Each of them must have three people, of whom two must be persons elected by the
Council from amongst its members, and the other shall be a person, who is co-opted by the Council
from amongst advocates, who possess the qualifications specified in the proviso to Sub-section (2)
of Section 3 and who are not members of the Council, and the senior-most advocate, amongst the
members of the Disciplinary Committee would be made the Chairman.
Section 16: It states that there are two classes of advocates; Senior Advocate and other Advocates.
An advocate, with his consent would be designated as a Senior Advocate if the Supreme Court or
High Court feels that he has the ability, standing at the Bar or special knowledge or experience in
field of law and is deserving for such distinctions. The Senior Advocate would be subject to
restrictions of Bar Council of India, which is prescribed in the interest of legal profession. Chapter I of
Part VI of the Rules of Bar Council of India makes provisions in relation to the Senior Advocates.
Section 24: This Section specifies the qualifications of a person who is entitled to be enrolled into
the Bar. It states the subject to the provisions of this Act, and the rules made there under, state that
a person would be qualified to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if he fulfils the conditions
like: he must be a citizen of India, above the age of 21 years, has obtained a law degree after the
12th day of March, 1967 and has cleared Bar Council of India exam. If the person has such
qualification he or she can enrol himself/ herself under any State Bar Council.
Section 24A: It states that a person, who is convicted of an offence which involves moral turpitude,
cannot be enrolled as an advocate. This applies till two years of elapsing since the expiry of the
sentence. While this is a disqualification for enrolment, the Supreme Court hasheldthat if the
disqualification is incurred after enrolment then the advocate must be disbarred for two years.
Section 29: This Section states that advocates are the only recognised class of persons who are
entitled to practise law. From the day they are appointed, only the class of ‘advocates’ are allowed to
practise the profession of law.
Section 30: This Section defines the right of advocate to practise. This Act allows an advocate, the
right to practise throughout the territory, before all the courts and tribunals.
Section 35: This Section defines the punishment of advocates for misconduct. It states that when a
receipt of a complaint is submitted or a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on
its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, then it shall refer the case for disposal to
its Disciplinary Committee. The Disciplinary Committee of a State Bar Council would then fix a date
for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned
and to the Advocate-General of the State.

What are the various landmark judgements ??? Discuss in brief.

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS
1. Pratap Chandra Mehta vs. State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh In this judgement, it was
observed that on failure to provide for the election, the Bar Council of India must constitute a special
committee for that purpose. Under Section 15(2), it is stated that without prejudice to the generality
of foregoing powers, rules can be made to provide for the electoral rolls and the manner of
publishing the results. The rules formed by the State Bar Council will become effective only after it
gets approval by the Bar Council of India, in terms of Section 15(3) of the Advocates Act. The
conduct of the State Bar Council must be maintained in consonance with the democratic principles,
keeping in mind the high professional standards of the advocates. Therefore, this power does not fall
beyond the preview and scope of Section 15, read in conjunction with other provisions. Further it
was held that, the language of Section 15(3) of the Advocates Act, is clear and the amended rules
had received the approval of the Bar Council of India.
2. T. N. Raghupathy vs High Court of Karnataka and others. In this case, the appellant claimed a
writ of mandamus for forming new norms in consonance with the provisions mentioned in Section
16(2) of the Advocates Act, relating to the designation of Senior Advocates. The Court observed that
the appellant did not have any locus standi to file a writ petition in view of the public interest. Learned
Senior Counsel, Mr. K. K. Venugopal, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam and Mr. Aditya
Sondhi submitted before the High Court that it is not right in holding that view. Some of the issues
that were raised in the writs did require consideration. It was concerned with the High Court only, as
it is the High Court that deals with the formation of rules, guidelines, regulation regarding the
designation of the Senior Advocates. Hence the impugned order was set aside and the High Court
was requested to consider the matter on merits.
3. Mahipal Singh Rana vs State of UP Here the Bar Council of India submitted that Section 24A of
the Advocates Act gives a bar against the admission of a person as an advocate if he is convicted of
any offence which involves moral turpitude. It also provides that the bar can be lifted after two years
of release. But the provisions did not explicitly mention the removal of an advocate if the conviction
is done after the person is registered as an advocate. It was stated that, the term moral turpitude has
to be understood because even a minor offence could be termed as involving moral turpitude. The
only other related provision was to take action under Section 35, and prove misconduct. It was
further submitted that only the Bar Council has the power to punish an advocate under professional
misconduct as per the provisions given under Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The counsel also
submitted that a general order must be communicated to all the courts regarding the conviction of an
advocate involving moral turpitude. And after the judgement is delivered, the Bar Council of India
and concerned Bar Councils start proceedings against such advocates.
4. Noratanman Courasia vs M. R. Murali Here the Supreme Court explored the term “professional
misconduct” in Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The facts of the case included, an advocate
assaulting the complainant, and asking him to refrain from proceeding with the case. The question
being put up was, whether the act of advocate would amount to misconduct? The Supreme Court
held that a lawyer is obliged to observe the norms of behaviour that are expected of him. In addition
to the fact that he was not acting in his capacity as an advocate, his behaviour as a whole was unfit
for an advocate. The Bar Council was justified in conducting disciplinary actions against him. The
Court had carried out an over view of the jurisprudence of the Court regarding misconduct of
advocates, and held that “misconduct” is incapable of a precise decision. It includes improper
behaviour, intentional wrongdoing, deliberate violation of a rule etc. Therefore, “misconduct” though
incapable of an appropriate definition, it acquires its connotation from the context, the delinquency in
its performance and its effect on the discipline and nature of duty.
5. Thyssen Krupp Industris vs Suresh Maruti Chougule, Union of India, Bar Council of India
and Others In this case, the Bombay High Court dismissed a challenge questioning the
constitutional validity of Section 36(4) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. It restricts the appearance
of lawyers in labour courts and tribunals stating that there must be a legal distinction between the
right of an advocate to practice law under Section 29 and 30 of Advocates Act and the right to
appear and address a court of law or tribunal. The welder filed an application against the
engagement of Thyssen’s with a legal practitioner, which was allowed by the Court. Thyssen’s
counsel argued that the assistance of a trained advocate is essential due to the complicacy related
with the industrial adjudication. Due to this, the companies are unable to represent their case before
a labour court effectively. The counsel on behalf of the welder argued that, right to practice law is not
a Fundamental Right, vested or a legal right, thus a party cannot claim such a right to engage an
advocate. The High Court held that there is a legal distinction between the two Acts and the right to
practice guaranteed under Advocates Act do not confer on a litigant the right to get represented by
any particular advocate, but can only be represented by an advocate if necessary. And, the right to
practice is not an absolute right but only restricted in nature. It was also observed that, as
Fundamental Rights do not provide a litigant the right to be represented by a lawyer in a court, it
becomes difficult to accept the arguments that Section 36(4) of ID Act is unconstitutional and ultra
vires with Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion The Advocate Act holds a great importance in laying down the guidelines and rules that
any person enrolled as an advocate must follow. It also gives grounds for the actions taken against
them if they commit any offence. It keeps the advocates under check and balance rule and this helps
in the smooth functioning of the legal system. Various landmark judgements have made the
ambiguity related with the Advocate Act clear.

DPLB – 1001
LL.B. (Part-I)[First Semester]
Examination 2016
 Bar Bench Relation
Professional Ethics and Accountancy for Lawyers
Written Test for Sessional Work
Time 2 Hrs 30 Minutes
Maximum Marks: 40

7. Discuss the constitution and functions of The Bar Council of India.

8. What are the Rights associated with an Advocate ? Explain.

9. Discuss the Duties of an Advocate towards – Another Advocate; Another Client

10. Write short notes on :

 Law Graduate
 Legal Practitioner
 Contempt of Court

11. What provisions have been made under the Indian Advocates Act, 1961 regarding the Dress of
Advocate ? Explain.

12. Choose the correct answer:

11. The term of Office of members of the State Bar Council is:
a. 6 years.
b. 5 years.
c. 3 years.
d. 4 years.
12. The Bar Council of India consists of the following members viz.,
a. The Attorney-General of India, ex-officio.
b. The Solicitor General of India, ex-officio.
c. One member elected by each State Bar Council from among its members.
d. Each one of the above.
13. The Seniority of an Advocate is determined on the basis of:
a. His date of enrolment.
b. His age.
c. His Clienteel.
d. Number of his appearances before High Court.
14. Any person who illegally practices in any Court shall be punished with:
a. Imprisonment which may be extended to 6 months.
b. Imprisonment which may be extended to 3 months.
c. Imprisonment which may be extended to one month.
d. Fine which may extend to Rs 5,000.
 15. An Advocate permitted to:
a. Review parliamentary bills for remuneration.
b. Edit legal text books at a salary.
c. Teach the students and set the examination question papers.
d. All of the above.
16. Any person aggrieved by an order made by disciplinary committee of Bar Council of India may
prefer an appeal before:
a. High Court.
b. Supreme Court.
c. Appellate Committee of The Bar Council of India.
d. No appeal lies.
17. An Advocate has the following duties towards opponent:
a. Not to make allegations against the opponent which do not have the support of
evidence.
b. Not to negotiate in any way on the subject matter on controversy except through the
adversary counsel.
c. Not to use unfair and malicious devices against the opponent.
d. Each one of the above is forbidden.
18. The Bar Council of India enjoys the power of:
a. Revision.
b. Review.
c. Appeal.
d. None of the above.
19. In Public Place other than a Court, an Advocate:
a. Should not wear band or gown.
b. May wear the gown but not the band.
c. May wear the band but not the gown.
d. There is no such restriction.
20. Every Advocate whose name is entered in the State role has a right to practice -
a. In all the Courts including the Supreme Court.
b. Before any tribunal or authority or person legally authorized to take evidence.
c. Both a. and b. are correct.
d. No right vested in an Advocate to practice law.

Write short notes on the salient features of the Indian Advocates Act, 1961
The Indian Advocates Act, 1961 was brought into force to implement all recommendations made by
the All India Bar Committee. The Advocates Act, 1961 has replaced the Indian Bar Councils Act. In
order to implement the recommendations of All India Bar Committee that was endorsed by
fourteenth Report of the Law Commission in 1955, this Advocates Act of 1961 came into existence.
The main objective of this Act is to integrate and constitute one class of legal practitioners called
‘Advocates’. It also aims at prescribing a uniform qualification for the Bar and creating an All India
Bar Council and State Bar Councils.It also gives the rights and duties of an advocate. According to
this act, “An advocate is who has entered any roll under the Advocate’s Act, 1961”. Before this Act,
there were different classes of legal practitioners under the Legal Practitioners Act. They were
Advocates, lawyers, vakils, etc. the Advocates Act has abolished these classes and has recognised
only one class of Advocates. They are then also classified as “Senior Advocates” and “other
advocates” on their merit. The status of a Senior Advocate is granted by the High Court or the
Supreme Court with consent of the advocate. Only an advocate who is enrolled in the "Common
roll" is entitled to practice in the Supreme Court or in any court, tribunal and in any other
body where an advocate can practice. According to this act, advocates have the right to practice
in any court. Under article 32 of this act, the advocate whose name is not registered under the
Advocates Act, can also practice in any court, but only at the discretion of the court.
KEY TAKEAWAYS:
 This provides the laws, rules and frame works related to legal practitioners.
 It aims to bring together only one class of legal practitioners called ‘Advocates’. Advocates
are allowed to practice throughout the state and before all courts and tribunals.
The main features of this act are as follows-
8. This act enabled the establishment of the Bar council of India and State Bar Councils.
9. Any advocate cannot enroll himself/ herself in more than one State Council, though he can
be transferred from one state council to another.
10. The Bar council was given an autonomous stature.
11. It provided for the provisions for similar roll of Advocates throughout the country.
12. It also provided to combine all the laws of the legal system into one.
13. There were various provisions set up for the Bar Council at state and central level.
14. The different titles like lawyer, vakil was scrapped off and a single title of Advocate was
applied.

Below mentioned are the important sections that are reflected in the Advocates Act. Section
2(1) (a): It states that an ‘Advocate’ is any person who has entered under any roll under the
provision of the Advocates Act, 1961. He argues in favour of his clients in court of law. So any
person, who fulfils the conditions required for an admission as an advocate, may be enrolled as an
advocate by the State Bar Council. The conditions that need to be fulfilled for being enrolled as an
Advocate are mentioned under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Section 7: It lays down the various functions, regulatory and mandates of the Bar Council. Mainly it
focuses on providing standards of professional conduct and etiquette foradvocates. It lays down the
procedure to be followed by the disciplinary committees. It safeguards the rights, privileges and
interests of the advocates. Help in promoting and supportinglaw reforms. It encourages legal
education and lay down guidelines for legal education. It carries out seminarson legal topics by
eminentjuristsand publishes the law journals and papers of legal interest. It provides legal aidto the
poor.
Section 9: According to this Section, a Bar Council must consist of one or more Disciplinary
Committees. Each of them must have three people, of whom two must be persons elected by the
Council from amongst its members, and the other shall be a person, who is co-opted by the Council
from amongst advocates, who possess the qualifications specified in the proviso to Sub-section (2)
of Section 3 and who are not members of the Council, and the senior-most advocate, amongst the
members of the Disciplinary Committee would be made the Chairman.
Section 16: It states that there are two classes of advocates; Senior Advocate and other Advocates.
An advocate, with his consent would be designated as a Senior Advocate if the Supreme Court or
High Court feels that he has the ability, standing at the Bar or special knowledge or experience in
field of law and is deserving for such distinctions. The Senior Advocate would be subject to
restrictions of Bar Council of India, which is prescribed in the interest of legal profession. Chapter I of
Part VI of the Rules of Bar Council of India makes provisions in relation to the Senior Advocates.
Section 24: This Section specifies the qualifications of a person who is entitled to be enrolled into
the Bar. It states the subject to the provisions of this Act, and the rules made there under, state that
a person would be qualified to be admitted as an advocate on a State roll, if he fulfils the conditions
like: he must be a citizen of India, above the age of 21 years, has obtained a law degree after the
12th day of March, 1967 and has cleared Bar Council of India exam. If the person has such
qualification he or she can enrol himself/ herself under any State Bar Council.
Section 24A: It states that a person, who is convicted of an offence which involves moral turpitude,
cannot be enrolled as an advocate. This applies till two years of elapsing since the expiry of the
sentence. While this is a disqualification for enrolment, the Supreme Court hasheldthat if the
disqualification is incurred after enrolment then the advocate must be disbarred for two years.
Section 29: This Section states that advocates are the only recognised class of persons who are
entitled to practise law. From the day they are appointed, only the class of ‘advocates’ are allowed to
practise the profession of law.
Section 30: This Section defines the right of advocate to practise. This Act allows an advocate, the
right to practise throughout the territory, before all the courts and tribunals.
Section 35: This Section defines the punishment of advocates for misconduct. It states that when a
receipt of a complaint is submitted or a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on
its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, then it shall refer the case for disposal to
its Disciplinary Committee. The Disciplinary Committee of a State Bar Council would then fix a date
for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned
and to the Advocate-General of the State.

What are the various landmark judgements ??? Discuss in brief.

LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS
1. Pratap Chandra Mehta vs. State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh In this judgement, it was
observed that on failure to provide for the election, the Bar Council of India must constitute a special
committee for that purpose. Under Section 15(2), it is stated that without prejudice to the generality
of foregoing powers, rules can be made to provide for the electoral rolls and the manner of
publishing the results. The rules formed by the State Bar Council will become effective only after it
gets approval by the Bar Council of India, in terms of Section 15(3) of the Advocates Act. The
conduct of the State Bar Council must be maintained in consonance with the democratic principles,
keeping in mind the high professional standards of the advocates. Therefore, this power does not fall
beyond the preview and scope of Section 15, read in conjunction with other provisions. Further it
was held that, the language of Section 15(3) of the Advocates Act, is clear and the amended rules
had received the approval of the Bar Council of India.
2. T. N. Raghupathy vs High Court of Karnataka and others. In this case, the appellant claimed a
writ of mandamus for forming new norms in consonance with the provisions mentioned in Section
16(2) of the Advocates Act, relating to the designation of Senior Advocates. The Court observed that
the appellant did not have any locus standi to file a writ petition in view of the public interest. Learned
Senior Counsel, Mr. K. K. Venugopal, Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Gopal Subramaniam and Mr. Aditya
Sondhi submitted before the High Court that it is not right in holding that view. Some of the issues
that were raised in the writs did require consideration. It was concerned with the High Court only, as
it is the High Court that deals with the formation of rules, guidelines, regulation regarding the
designation of the Senior Advocates. Hence the impugned order was set aside and the High Court
was requested to consider the matter on merits.
3. Mahipal Singh Rana vs State of UP Here the Bar Council of India submitted that Section 24A of
the Advocates Act gives a bar against the admission of a person as an advocate if he is convicted of
any offence which involves moral turpitude. It also provides that the bar can be lifted after two years
of release. But the provisions did not explicitly mention the removal of an advocate if the conviction
is done after the person is registered as an advocate. It was stated that, the term moral turpitude has
to be understood because even a minor offence could be termed as involving moral turpitude. The
only other related provision was to take action under Section 35, and prove misconduct. It was
further submitted that only the Bar Council has the power to punish an advocate under professional
misconduct as per the provisions given under Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The counsel also
submitted that a general order must be communicated to all the courts regarding the conviction of an
advocate involving moral turpitude. And after the judgement is delivered, the Bar Council of India
and concerned Bar Councils start proceedings against such advocates.
4. Noratanman Courasia vs M. R. Murali Here the Supreme Court explored the term “professional
misconduct” in Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The facts of the case included, an advocate
assaulting the complainant, and asking him to refrain from proceeding with the case. The question
being put up was, whether the act of advocate would amount to misconduct? The Supreme Court
held that a lawyer is obliged to observe the norms of behaviour that are expected of him. In addition
to the fact that he was not acting in his capacity as an advocate, his behaviour as a whole was unfit
for an advocate. The Bar Council was justified in conducting disciplinary actions against him. The
Court had carried out an over view of the jurisprudence of the Court regarding misconduct of
advocates, and held that “misconduct” is incapable of a precise decision. It includes improper
behaviour, intentional wrongdoing, deliberate violation of a rule etc. Therefore, “misconduct” though
incapable of an appropriate definition, it acquires its connotation from the context, the delinquency in
its performance and its effect on the discipline and nature of duty.
5. Thyssen Krupp Industris vs Suresh Maruti Chougule, Union of India, Bar Council of India
and Others In this case, the Bombay High Court dismissed a challenge questioning the
constitutional validity of Section 36(4) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. It restricts the appearance
of lawyers in labour courts and tribunals stating that there must be a legal distinction between the
right of an advocate to practice law under Section 29 and 30 of Advocates Act and the right to
appear and address a court of law or tribunal. The welder filed an application against the
engagement of Thyssen’s with a legal practitioner, which was allowed by the Court. Thyssen’s
counsel argued that the assistance of a trained advocate is essential due to the complicacy related
with the industrial adjudication. Due to this, the companies are unable to represent their case before
a labour court effectively. The counsel on behalf of the welder argued that, right to practice law is not
a Fundamental Right, vested or a legal right, thus a party cannot claim such a right to engage an
advocate. The High Court held that there is a legal distinction between the two Acts and the right to
practice guaranteed under Advocates Act do not confer on a litigant the right to get represented by
any particular advocate, but can only be represented by an advocate if necessary. And, the right to
practice is not an absolute right but only restricted in nature. It was also observed that, as
Fundamental Rights do not provide a litigant the right to be represented by a lawyer in a court, it
becomes difficult to accept the arguments that Section 36(4) of ID Act is unconstitutional and ultra
vires with Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion The Advocate Act holds a great importance in laying down the guidelines and rules that
any person enrolled as an advocate must follow. It also gives grounds for the actions taken against
them if they commit any offence. It keeps the advocates under check and balance rule and this helps
in the smooth functioning of the legal system. Various landmark judgements have made the
ambiguity related with the Advocate Act clear.