The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions questioning the cancellation of the 2026 Advocates-on-Record Examination and refused to interfere with the decision. It also directed that all aggrieved candidates must send one consolidated representation to the Chief Justice of India for consideration.
The Supreme Court dismissed petitions challenging the cancellation of the 2026 Advocates-on-Record (AoR) Examination.
It directed that any aggrieved candidates should submit a consolidated representation to the Chief Justice of India for consideration.
A Bench comprising Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice PB Varale noted that several applicants among them candidates who had cleared the 2025 AoR Examination claimed that cancelling the next consecutive test violated their right to take the examination in accordance with the applicable rules.
The Bench also recorded that newly enrolled aspirants argued they had already invested substantial time in preparation and that their efforts had gone down the drain.
During the proceedings, the Court was informed that multiple representations have already been filed with the CJI regarding the cancellation of the 2026 examination.
Observing that it would be more appropriate for the Court’s ends of justice to be served, the Bench said the petitioners should compile all grievances into a single, comprehensive submission addressed to the Chief Justice.
Making it clear that it did not intend to entertain the matter on the judicial side, the Court said,
“We see no reason why it would not be considered sympathetically,”
Petitioners were asked to submit the consolidated representation within 10 days.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan argued that the Supreme Court Rules provide remedies for AoR candidates and that different groups of candidates are impacted in distinct ways under the regulatory framework.
Senior Advocate Shadan Farasat submitted that preparation for the AoR examination starts well in advance and that candidates had undergone rigorous training.
Justice Kumar remarked on the large number of applicants, saying,
“There are a number of AoRs,”
When counsel pointed out that candidates had narrowly missed the qualifying marks, the Bench responded that a shortfall, even if slight, still amounted to failure.
Senior Advocate Uday Singh also contended that some candidates had cleared all but one paper, and were therefore adversely affected by the cancellation. He argued that the rules allow candidates to reappear in consecutive examination cycles.
During the course of submissions, Senior Advocate Sankaranarayanan suggested that one possible option could be to defer the examination to the following year.
The Bench, however, reiterated its confidence that the matter would be handled appropriately in the institutional process, stating that the Chief Justice would consider the issue properly.
Justice Kumar remarked,
“We’ve got the most sympathetic Chief Justice. We are confident,”
With these observations, the petitions were disposed of, leaving the decision to be taken administratively by the office of the Chief Justice of India.
One of the petitions, filed by Mandeep Kalra through the AoR route, challenges a notice dated April 30, 2026 issued by the Registrar (Judicial) and Secretary, Board of Examiners.
The notice stated that the AoR examination would not be held this year “in view of the overall strength of the AORs,” and that the next examination is only likely in 2027.
The petitioner claims to be an advocate who appeared in the 2025 AoR examination and cleared three out of four papers, falling within the category of candidates governed by Regulation 11(i) of the AoR Examination Regulations.
Under that provision, such candidates are said to be entitled to reappear in the remaining paper in the immediately succeeding examination cycle.
The plea contends that the notice violates Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution by treating different categories of candidates in the same manner.
It argues that candidates who have nearly completed the qualification process cannot be treated as equivalent to fresh applicants or to candidates who failed completely.
Additionally, The Supreme Court of India has announced that the 2026 Advocates-on-Record (AOR) Examination stands cancelled after assessing the overall strength of practicing AORs.
The April 30 notification confirms the exam will resume next year as per the Competent Authority’s orders.
Case Title: Dania Nayyar & Ors. v. Registrar General, Supreme Court of India & Ors.