Kerala High Court
K.T. Mathew vs The Bar Council Of India on 11 April, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 7792 OF 2018
PETITIONER/S:
K.T. MATHEW
AGED 58 YEARS
S/O. THOMAS,KURUVANTHANATHU HOUSE,
KOLANI P.O. THODUPUZHA,
IDUKKI DISTRICT-685608.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
SRI.DIPU JAMES
SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN
SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
SRI.SETHURAM DHARMAPALAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
21 ROSE AVENUE, INSTITUTIONAL AREA,
NEW DELHI-110002, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
2 THE BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA
BAR COUNCIL BHAVAN, NEAR HIGH COURT CAMPUS,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682031
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
BY ADV SRI.T.T.RAKESH
SRI.RAJITH, S.C, FOR R1
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P. (C) No.7792 of 2018 2
EASWARAN S. , J.
-------------------------
W.P. (C) No.7792 of 2018
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of April 2024
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
i) to call for the records which lead to the issuance of
Ext.P3 to the extent it demanded payment of Special
Fee under different heads in Column 5 Additional Fees
for the Candidates if applicable and to issue a writ in the
nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order
or direction quashing the same;
ii) to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any
other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding
the 2nd respondent to accept the application for
enrollment submitted by the petitioner without insisting
payment of Special Fee and permit the petitioner to
enroll as an advocate in the next enrollment function;
iii) to declare that the Special Fee prescribed in Ext.P3 is
illegal, unconstitutional and ultra vires the Advocates
Act, Bar Council of India Rules and Kerala Bar Council
Rules.
2. The petitioner states that he was a permanent
employee of the Idukki District Cooperative Bank Ltd. and, while
in service he had obtained graduation in law. After his
retirement on 31.01.2018, the petitioner submitted Ext.P4
application for admission as an advocate on the roll of the Bar
Council of Kerala, but, the same was not accepted by the 2 nd
respondent stating that the petitioner has not remitted the spcial
fee prescribed as per Ext.P3.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
contended that the demand of special fee apart from the general
fee is illegal and without jurisdiction.
4. The question as to whether, for enrollment as an
advocate - post-employment/retirement, levy of the special fee
is proper or not came up for consideration before this Court in
Koshy T v. Bar Council of Kerala, Ernakulam and Another
[2017 KHC 553] wherein a learned Single Judge of this Court
has held that levy of the special fee is ultra vires and
unauthorized.
5. I am in respectful agreement with the dictum laid down
by the Single Bench in Koshy T. (Supra). Accordingly, following
the aforesaid judgment, Ext.P3 to the extent of insisting special
fee on the petitioner is quashed. It is also brought to the notice
of this Court that the petitioner has enrolled as a lawyer on
16.12.2018 pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court
on 8.3.2018. Since this Court has held that levy of special fee is
ultra vires under the Constitution of India it is declared that the
petitioner need not remit such fee.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7792/2018
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF DEGREE CERTIFICATE DTD.
19.12.2000 ISSUED BY BANGALORE
UNIVERSITY
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF ORDER
NO.HRM/26/0001/RETIREMENT TO STAFF/2017-
18 DTD 01.01.2018
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF ENROLLMENT FEE STRUCTURE
DTD. NIL PUBLISHED BY 2ND RESPONDENT IN
ITS OFFICIAL WEBSITE.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR
ENROLMENT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ON
03.03.2018
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C)
NO.4990 OF 2017 DTD.16.02.2017
