MADHU V. Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners say that they are presently working with the Government of Kerala and that they are interested to apply for the evening class Courses conducted by the Government Law College, Thriuvananthapuram and the Kerala Law Academy College, Thiruvananthapuram. They say that they were afflicted by Polio in their childhood and thus, suffering from locomotor disability and have produced Exts.P1 and P2 medical certificates in substantiation.

(2.) The proximate cause pleaded by the petitioners to approach this Court is that even though there is a 3% quota set apart for persons with disability as per the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Disability Act'), the threshold marks - for securing admission to the Courses in Law as per Clause 7 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008, as published by the Bar Council of India has not been lowered for candidates like them for securing admission. The petitioners say that as per Clause 7 of the afore mentioned Rules, the threshold provided is 45%, which is the same for all categories, including those with special disabilities. The petitioners therefore, pray that the Bar Council be directed to consider reducing the threshold mark for persons like them, under the provisions of the Disability Act; and that the respondents be directed to offer them admission on such basis.

(3.) However, in response to the afore submissions made on behalf of the petitioners by their learned counsel, Sri.S.K.Adithyan, Sri.Rajit, the learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent - Bar Council of India, submitted that the questions posed by the petitioners in this case are at the best academic, since the Bar Council does not recognize the Evening Course. He submitted that, in any event of the matter, the Rules of Legal Education, as published by his client, are intended for maintaining the highest standards of legal profession and therefore, that the question of reducing the threshold for persons with disability etc., are matters of policy, which will have to be considered by the Council at the appropriate level. He submitted that since the petitioners have not even approached the Council until now, but have rushed to this Court through this writ petition, none of the prayers sought for herein may be granted.