The Delhi High Court heard pleas by the Bar Council of India and Association of Tax Lawyers opposing non-advocates in tribunals. Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Madhu Jain noted Section 30 grants enrolled advocates exclusive rights of appearance nationwide.
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court is hearing writ petitions on whether non-advocates like Chartered Accountants (CAs), Company Secretaries (CSs), and Cost Accountants can argue cases in tribunals. Petitions from the Bar Council of India and Association of Tax Lawyers claim the Advocates Act, 1961, reserves such rights solely for enrolled advocates in courts, tribunals, and similar forums.
A Division Bench consisting of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Madhu Jain was informed that, according to Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961, only Advocates are permitted to appear before all Courts, Tribunals, or any other authority, holding exclusive rights to practice in these forums.
ALSO READ: Himachal Advocates Protest Against Proposed Amendments to Advocates Act
The court acknowledged that these petitions present a significant issue concerning whether individuals who are not enrolled as Advocates can represent clients before Tribunals. A class of such individuals includes Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, Cost Accountants, and others with similar qualifications, irrespective of whether they possess an LL.B. degree.
Submissions of Parties:
On one side, the Petitioners namely, the Bar Council of India and the Association of Tax Lawyers argued that the Advocates Act, 1961, stipulates that only Advocates may practice before any Court or Tribunal, and enrollment with the State Bar Council is mandatory for this purpose.
Conversely, representatives of other professions, including Chartered Accountants and Company Secretaries, assert that Section 432 of the Companies Act, 2013, along with relevant Practice Directions and Rules established by the Tribunals, permits them to represent clients.
Additionally, Mr. Purav Middha, the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 541/2020, has sadly passed away. His petition challenges the constitutional validity of Section 432 of the Companies Act, 2013. Mr. Ashish Middha is allowed to substitute as the Petitioner and may either present the case himself or secure the services of another advocate.
Regarding W.P.(C) 4003/2017, involving the Association of Tax Lawyers, Mr. Rajeev Saxena, Senior Counsel, has provided statements today, reviewing various provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961, the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949, and the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, along with other relevant materials.
Mr. Saxena summarized his argument by stating that Section 33 of the Advocates Act, 1961, prohibits individuals not enrolled as Advocates from practicing law. He further asserted that any unauthorized practice in Courts, Tribunals, or other authorities would be subject to penalties under Section 45 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Additionally, Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961, specifies that only Advocates may appear before all Courts, Tribunals, or other authorities, granting them exclusive rights to practice in these settings. He added that only Advocates can conduct evidence in such forums. Mr. Saxena requested additional time to prepare a written summary of arguments.
Mr. Preetpal Singh, representing the Bar Council of India (BCI), mentioned he was out of the station due to a family wedding. He also requested an adjournment to participate physically and contest the matter.
Order of the Court
Given the requests from both counsels, the Court has agreed to adjourn the case. It is also noted that counsels wishing to submit or adjust any additional written arguments must do so at least two weeks before the next hearing date, with copies of these submissions to be exchanged.
The case is set to be heard on March 16, 2026, as part of the ‘Supplementary list.’
The Court has explicitly stated that no further adjournments will be granted in these matters, which will be regarded as part-heard.
Case Title: BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs UOI W.P.(C) 541/2020
PURAV MIDDHA Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
ASSOCIATION OF TAX LAWYERS Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
Read Attachment:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
