• Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
  • Contact Us
  • Pages
    • About Us
    • Cookie Policy
    • DMCA
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
No Result
View All Result
Law Luxury
No Result
View All Result
Home Legal Advice

Reconsider Upper Age Limit For Admission To LL.B. Courses, SC To Bar Council Of India [Read Order]

Dominick Rios by Dominick Rios
March 15, 2019
in Legal Advice
0
0
SHARES
4
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

he Supreme Court on Tuesday directed the Bar Council of India to rethink, after listening to the diverse stakeholders, the top age-restrict for taking admission to the five-yr and 3-year law degree courses. The bench headed through Justice SA Bobde changed into listening to a plea by using Rishab Duggal for setting apart a 2016 round via which the BCI had restored Clause 28 in Schedule III of Rule 11 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 (that became earlier withdrawn in 2013), which arbitrarily provides for a maximum age restriction of as low as twenty years for taking admission inside the incorporated bachelor of law degree programme.

Related Posts

MOBILE LOST COMPLAINT LETTER TO POLICE

Soaring Manhattan real estate sales could be a mirage

Divorced women could revert to maiden

The Imperfect, Unfinished Work of Women’s Suffrage

While both Justice Bobde and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul were of the view that there’s no particular age to gather training, Justice Kaul determined that humans from economically-weaker sections may not have linear schooling and can grow to be being older than other college students and so must now not be disadvantaged of the opportunity.

The recommend for the petitioner Advocate Zoheb Hossain stated the instance of a 70-12 months old Chinese farmer who pursued a law degree to sue a country-owned employer which had wrongfully acquired his land. “There are women who determine to take in regulation professionally after elevating their youngsters, or even folks that make mid-profession adjustments”, he made his case. The 2017 privateness judgment in Justice K. S. Puttaswamy changed into relied on to argue that the proper to select one’s career is an issue of preference and privateness, being a travelling right, is also violated by this Age restriction of 20 years for the five-12 months programme and 30 years for the three-yr route. In the petition, it’s been submitted that the impugned provision violates the fundamental rights of aspiring regulation students underneath Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution. The plea avers that during a comparable pass in the yr 1993, the BCI had delivered Rule nine under Chapter III of Part VI of the BCI Rules, barring the ones persons who have completed 45 years of age from enrolling as an advocate under the Advocates Act, 1961.

 

The stated Rule nine was challenged earlier than the Apex Court within the case of Indian Council of Legal Aid & Advice v. BCI where it turned into struck down- “Therefore, the advent of a rule unreasonably restricting the admission to the regulation publications itself being a harsher and an excellent more unreasonable limit at the rights of aspiring law students is contrary to the precept and ratio laid down by using this Hon’ble Court in Indian Council of Legal Aid & Advice”, it become contended. Further, it’s far talked about that in view of the Conflicting judgments exceeded by way of one-of-a-kind High Courts in writ petitions tough the validity of the stated clause, the interference of the pinnacle Court is imperative to make certain truth in the lives of college students and consistency within the technique of the BCI- even as the Punjab & Haryana and the Bombay High Courts have declared the clause to be extremely vires the provisions of the Advocates Act, the Madras High Court has upheld the age-restriction.

Next Post

IIFL arm seeks criminal recommendation in opposition to Sebi order

No Result
View All Result

Today Trending

Impact and Effects of COVID-19 on Immigration Applicants

January 15, 2021

Why You Should Hire An International Law Firm

October 20, 2020

Benefits of Hiring a Personal Injury Lawyer

December 22, 2020

The Indian Women Who Fought Their Way Into the Legal Profession

March 15, 2019

5 Steps to Prepare for an Indianapolis Attorney Consultation

September 28, 2020

The Importance of an Intellectual Property Lawyer

September 12, 2020

Recent Post

Help Stop Sexual Assault: Know your Rights

February 18, 2021

MOBILE LOST COMPLAINT LETTER TO POLICE

February 16, 2021

Steps to Take After Getting Involved in a Car Accident

January 25, 2021
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Cookie Policy
  • DMCA
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Mail us: [email protected]

© 2021 lawluxury - All Rights Reserved to Us!

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Law
    • Accident Law
    • Business Law
      • Copyright Law
      • Real Estate Law
    • Child Law
    • Women Law
    • Criminal law
    • Family law
    • International Law
      • Cyber law
      • Traffic law
  • Attorney
  • Divorce
  • Legal Advice
  • Contact Us
  • Pages
    • About Us
    • Cookie Policy
    • DMCA
    • Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use

© 2021 lawluxury - All Rights Reserved to Us!