Hc writ to ban karnataka/ap qualified from practicing in tn

The quoted lot (ie those in the quoted 10 years list) should come together and file a case in SC to quash this case as it is against the constitutional provisions which guarantees equality. There cannot be such specific discrimination against qualification from certain states. There should not be infringement of one section on another. If awarding degree is the responsibility of an university, then leave it to them to do their duty. After joining the profession, if there are few who does not adhere to professional ethics, then there are provisions under the Advocates Act to complain against then. The Disciplinary Committee will take action accordingly. Instead of using such organised procedures, one should not make sweeping statements that all from certain colleges/universities/states are bad. This sets a bad trend. Hope the concerned take note of this and drop this case. If this advocate has specific complaints, he should take up the matter with State Bar Council and BCI to debar/suspend the concerned advocates than pointing fingers at all.

Also, assuming that few are not attending classes, this point too has lost its relevance in the changing education scenario. These days students' intellect are better that they can study their subjects with minimum supervision. Infact, legal students can gain more practical knowledge under an advocate. Like CA students, LLB students too should be allowed to take exams without going to organised classrooms. Like CA students, LLB students should be allowed to spend more time under an advocate than in classrooms. This will help the students.

Apropos, the above writ should be challenged at any cost and dismissed with cost.

Thanks, for posting this important writ petition trying to eradicate this evil practise in legal profesion, and not only Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh but it maybe prevailing through out the country. I am told that some senior advocates in some States have even refrain themselves from the profession.  I would appreciate if you up date me on the out come of this Writ petition.Indeed it's a bold move.

 Hope the Hon,ble court will not entertain the writ..It is against the constitutional right of doing profession in any part of the country.

dear sir,i m doing llb degree@tirupati. now finished stage.wait for reult,it will be almost pass. my problem-  i studied SSLC chennai,no +2 but i done B.com at corresspondence@madras university.then i finished LLB in tirupati. if any problem in my enrollement in tamilnadu barcouncil? some body told that, the latest writ will affect my enrollement. i am in confusion stage.what can i do. my batch was (2007-2010).already one writ order (promisory estoppel) passed by chennai HC on  behalf of open university, states that the legal admission restricted on 2009.i am expecting a clear guidence and oblige..

thanking you sir.

I heard that the State Bar Council of Tamilnadu has informed to the other SBCs  especially Bar council of Andhra pradesh and Karnataka that they should not enroll the lawyers in their Bar council  who came from Tamilnadu and completed their LL.B in other states and Tamilnadu Bar council also will not enroll them, If it continues what is the remedy for those who are studying in other states?

Regards

K. Hasan

Dear Sir,   

Inan interim judgment that is bound to have serious implications for graduates from law colleges in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) has restrained the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu (BCT) from enrolling them for practicing in the State. Besides, the court has directed the BCT to cancel enrollment of LLB graduates, who had obtained degrees in violation of Rule 28 of Legal Education.

Justice N Kirubakaran passed the interim order while hearing a petition seeking to restrain law graduates from the neighbouring States from enrolling in the Bar Council here. The judge has also directed the Bar Council of India and BCT to find out the violations in the matter of enrolment of LLB degree holders, who had obtained admission into law colleges in the neighbouring States after June 2009. The two bodies must also take appropriate action including suspension of these advocates and cancel their enrollment, after enquiry.

The charge is that many students who joined these colleges did not attend classes but were allowed to writeexaminations and get their degrees.

The BCT counsel, incidentally, expressed doubts regarding the power to suspend and cancel the enrollment of these lawyers.

However, the judge said, “The provision of the Advocate Act states that the Bar Council has got incidental, auxiliary and implied powers to suspend and cancel the enrolment in case of violation and misconduct. Even if it is not provided under the Act, by virtue of Section 16 of the General Clause Act, 1897, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has got power.”

Further the judge directed that there person such advocates, Karmegam, Pandi Kamatchi and Joseph Arul Jayaseelan who had enrolled in the BCT despite having criminal records, must be removed from the rolls.

Earlier V Ramesh an advocate from Madurai approached the court alleging that some universities in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka were selling law degrees for a price without imparting legal education to candidates. Hence he sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the LLB graduates from practicing in Tamil Nadu. 

        I need your valuable advice regarding this interim order.

Regards

K. Hasan

https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil_nadu/LLB-Grads-Cant-Join-TN-Bar-For-Now-HC/2014/02/19/article2064923.ece#.UxVPdfmSx21

What is the current status of this case