Supreme Court Hears Petition Challenging Fees for All India Bar Examination (AIBE)

The Supreme Court of India today heard a petition filed by an Advocate, appearing as petitioner-in-person, challenging the fees and other incidental charges for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE). The petitioner contended that the Bar Council of India (BCI)'s fee of Rs. 3,500 for the AIBE violates the Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India (2024).

Background of the Case

The petitioner's main argument is that the fee charged for the AIBE is in violation of the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India. In this judgment, a three-judge bench headed by former CJI DY Chandrachud, along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, ruled that the enrolment fee for advocates should not exceed Rs. 750 for the general category and Rs. 125 for advocates belonging to SC/ST categories, as specified under Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

Court’s Proceedings and Order

The bench, comprising Justices Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, briefly heard the petitioner’s arguments before passing an order. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to first approach the Bar Council of India (BCI) with a representation regarding the fees. If the petitioner does not receive a reasonable response from the BCI, he can approach the Supreme Court again.

Justice Pardiwala, while addressing the petitioner, made an oral remark that the BCI requires funding to maintain its operations. He questioned, "You want the Bar Council to survive or not? They have to recover something. Once you pay this amount of Rs. 3,500, you will start earning Rs. 3,50,000. What is the problem in initially paying Rs. 3,500 to BCI?"

Additionally, Justice Pardiwala expressed concern regarding the invocation of Article 32 of the Constitution in this case, suggesting that the petitioner should have approached a High Court for relief.

Petitioner’s Response

The petitioner argued that the high fee for the AIBE violates the fundamental rights of young advocates, especially those wishing to practice law, and emphasized that the fee is disproportionate and unreasonable. He pointed out that the fee burden on advocates could hinder their access to the profession, particularly for those from economically weaker sections.

Court's Final Order

The Court issued the following order:

"This petition, filed in public interest, relates to the fees for the All India Bar Examination. The petitioner, a practising advocate, raised concerns regarding the decision in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India and argued that the recovery of Rs. 3,500, along with other incidental charges, as a prerequisite for appearing in the AIBE, is in violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) of the Constitution and Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961.

We believe the petitioner should first bring this issue to the attention of the Bar Council of India. It is open for the petitioner to file an appropriate representation to the BCI and await a response. If no response is received within a reasonable time, or if the response is negative, the petitioner may return to the Court.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court has provided the petitioner with the opportunity to engage with the Bar Council of India (BCI) regarding the AIBE fee issue before returning to the Court for further legal proceedings. The Court’s approach suggests that the matter could be resolved through a dialogue with the BCI, while also recognizing the petitioner’s fundamental rights and the BCI’s financial requirements.

Case Details: SANYAM GANDHI v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR W.P.(C) No. 28/2025