JALPA PRADEEPBHAI DESAI Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By filing the present petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondents to act in accordance with the guidelines in respondent No.1-Bar Council of India's letter dated 21st Sept., 2013. It is further prayed to direct the respondents to issue permanent enrolment number to the petitioner in view of decision taken by respondent No.1 as per its aforementioned letter dated 21st Sept., 2013. Another prayer was made to direct respondent Nos.2 and 3 to grant temporary enrolment number to the petitioner.

(2.) The issue arises with reference to Rule 49 of Chapter-II Part-6 of the Bar Council of India Rules. In order to address and appreciate the controversy, the said Rule is usefully reproduced at the outset herein below.

(3.) Adverting to the facts pleaded in the petition and available from the record of the petition, the petitioner herein having passed out five years integrated course of B.A., LL.B. from Maharaja Sayaji Rao University, Vadodara, got selected during her academic period in campus interview of Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation') and she was given appointment as Legal Consultant also known as legal expert having been so selected. Copy of selection letter dated 19th March, 2012 which is on record, inter alia stated that as per the contract agreement executed between the Corporation and petitioner for taking services of the petitioner as legal expert, petitioner is required to join. It appears that while the petitioner was engaged as Legal Consultant or legal expert with the Corporation, she wanted to get Sanad for practicing in law in the Bar Council of Gujarat-respondent No.2 herein. It further appears that petitioner was informed that she was required to be given undertaking on affidavit that she is not an employee of any establishment including the Corporation, which is a condition for getting enrolment as an advocate.