Case Note & Summary
The case involves a challenge by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and its Principal Law Officer against resolutions of the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa that deleted the exception allowing full-time salaried law officers to practice as advocates. The petitioners argued that municipal law officers should be entitled to appear and plead in courts. The High Court of Bombay, in a judgment delivered on 17 October 2012, upheld the validity of the resolutions, holding that the Bar Council acted within its powers under Section 49(1)(ah) of the Advocates Act, 1961. The Court noted that the exception was originally for law officers of Central/State Government or public corporations, but was deleted in 2001. The Court found that municipal corporations are not 'State' under Article 12 for this purpose, and that the deletion applies to all full-time salaried employees, including municipal law officers. The petition was dismissed, affirming that full-time salaried municipal advocates cannot practice as advocates.
Headnote
A) Advocates Act, 1961 - Rule 49 - Full-time salaried employment - Prohibition on practice - The Bar Council of India amended Rule 49 deleting the exception for law officers of Central/State Government or public corporations. The Court held that the amendment is valid and municipal law officers cannot claim exemption as they are not 'law officers' within the meaning of the exception. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ jurisdiction - Challenge to Bar Council resolutions - The Court held that the resolutions of the Bar Council of India and State Bar Council are within their rule-making power under Section 49(1)(ah) of the Advocates Act, 1961, and are not ultra vires. (Paras 2-5) C) Municipal Corporation - Law Officers - Right to practice - The Court held that municipal advocates in full-time salaried employment cannot simultaneously practice as advocates, as they are not covered by any exception under Rule 49. The deletion of the exception applies uniformly. (Paras 3-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether full-time salaried law officers of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai are entitled to act, appear and plead in courts as advocates despite being in full-time employment, and whether the deletion of the exception in Rule 49 by the Bar Council of India is valid.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the resolutions of the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa. The Court held that the deletion of the exception in Rule 49 is valid and that full-time salaried law officers of the Municipal Corporation cannot practice as advocates.
Law Points
- Rule 49 of the Bar Council of India Rules prohibits full-time salaried employees from practicing as advocates
- exception for law officers of Central/State Government or public corporations was deleted in 2001
- municipal corporation is not a 'State' under Article 12 for this purpose
- law officers of municipal corporation cannot claim right to practice while in full-time employment
