The Supreme Court has issued notice to the UP Bar Council for demanding Rs 14,000 from new advocates under “certificate of practice,” calling it a clear conflict with its 2024 ruling in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India. The Court said Bar Councils cannot charge beyond the statutory enrolment fee.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on 25 August 2025 issued notice on a petition that questions the practice of the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council asking newly enrolled lawyers to pay Rs 14,000 under the title of “certificate of practice.”
The Court pointed out that this step by the State Bar Council seems to directly go against its earlier judgment in Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India (2024).
In the Gaurav Kumar case, which was decided on 30 July 2024, the Supreme Court had clearly said that Bar Councils cannot charge enrolment fees more than what is written in Section 24 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
As per the law, the highest enrolment fee allowed is Rs 750 for candidates from the general category and Rs 125 for candidates from SC/ST categories. The Court had further explained that no State Bar Council or even the Bar Council of India can demand any money over this limit, no matter if they call it “enrolment fee” or “optional fee.”
When this new matter, filed by advocate Deepak Yadav, came before a bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan, the Court at first asked why such petitions were being filed again and again when a very clear ruling had already been made in the Gaurav Kumar case.
Also Read: AIBE | How To Crack All India Bar Examination In Your 1st Attempt !
The petitioner’s lawyer argued that before the Gaurav Kumar ruling, the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council was charging around Rs 16,500 as enrolment fees. But even after the ruling, instead of following the legal limit, the Bar Council started asking for Rs 14,000, calling it fees for “certificate of practice.”
The counsel also pointed to an official communication dated 20 July 2025 issued by the UP Bar Council which confirms this demand.
Taking this communication into account, the bench observed:
“Prima facie, the communication issued by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh is in direct conflict with the directions issued in Gaurav Kumar.”
After noting this, the Court decided to issue notice in the case.
Also Read: “A New Opportunity for Final Year Law Students”: BCI Allows Registration for AIBE XIX
It is important to note that earlier this year, another bench of the Supreme Court that included Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan had again made it clear that neither the Bar Council of India nor any State Bar Council has the right to collect any extra amounts in the name of optional or administrative fees when a lawyer is enrolling.
This latest petition has now brought to light bigger worries about how State Bar Councils are not following the binding directions of the Supreme Court.
Case Ttle:
Title: Deepak Yadav v. Bar Council of India
W.P.(C) No. 774/2025
Click Here to Read More Reports on AIBE
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
