The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently dismissed a PIL seeking directions to the Bar Council of India to frame Rules regarding working hours, stipend payment and other working conditions for the Law Interns.
The PIL has been filed by a Law Student, Siddharth Shrivastava in pro bono publico litigation. The Court termed the plea as 'miserably misleaded' and held:
"If a law student is expected to do internship, he can not be a liability either that of a Bar Council of India or for that purpose any other establishment, instead, he has to gain experience with the permission granted to attend the court proceedings during court hours/working hours of establishment."
The Court remarked that the tenor, in which the writ petition is drafted and relief claimed, it appears that the petitioner is trying to assert as if either he is in the employment of the Bar Council of India or that of the establishment named in the plea clause seeking rights and stated that isn't the case in reality.
The Court also stressed that inturn Internship enhances the resume of the Law Students and he/she benefits from it in their future careers and dismissed the plea.
"Such experience shall enure benefit to him in furtherance of his career and not otherwise."
In the plea, the petitioner-student had sought primarily the following reliefs:
(ii) Make stipend mandatory for interns working in private sector and to draft rules for government offices about what internship should be paid and what should not, to prevent every intern from getting exploited.
(iii) Make a forum dedicated to solve the issues faced by interns only.
(iv) Issue any other writ, order or direction in the nature of writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in facts and circumstances of case;
(v) Cost of the petition may also be allowed
Read Order Here:
Picture Source :
