M. SIVATHANU Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANMOHAN Singh Liberhan,C.J . 1.This writ appeal arises out of the order dated 22.7.1997,dismissing the writ petition,declining to dispense with the apprenticeship training.

(2.) SKELETAL admitted facts run as follows:Petitioner was employed in the legal department of a Nationalised Bank for a period of fifteen years.It was claimed that by virtue of his service in the legal department,he acquired experience by appearing in consumer forums or defending the Bank in various Forums,by reading and drafting of pleadings,by analysing the judgments of various courts for deciding whether appeal or revision has to be filed against the judgment rendered against the Bank.The petitioner passed his Law Degree through correspondence course as well as three year course by attending regular classes in 1986.Under Advocates Act,1961 Bar Council of India framed Rules,for eligibility to be enrolled as an advocate on the State roll of Advocates,provided apprenticeship of one year under a designated senior Lawyer or Advocate having 15 years of practice at Bar being in continuous active practice in courts,who has been specifically authorised to impart training(herein after termed as 'Guides ').Exemption from undergoing training was provided to Judicial Officers,Prosecutors,Vakils,Pleaders and Mukhtars having worked in that capacity for one year.

(3.) SECTION 24 of the Advocates Act,1961 provided for eligibility for one to be admitted as an advocate on a state roll under it one has to complete the age of twenty one years and possess the degree of Law from any University in India which is recognised for the purpose of this(Advocates Act)Act by the Bar Council of India and fulfil such other conditions as specified by the Rules made by the Bar Council of India or by the State.