New Delhi

The Supreme Court has affirmed the authority of the Bar Council of India (BCI) to levy a separate fee for conducting the All India Bar Examination (AIBE), dismissing a challenge that claimed the levy was illegal and contrary to the Advocates Act.

A bench of justices JB Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta, while rejecting a writ petition filed by Sanyam Gandhi, clarified that the bar imposed earlier on the BCI from charging enrollment fees over and above what is prescribed under the Advocates Act would not apply to the AIBE, which is an entirely different exercise.

“The decision in Gaurav Kumar Vs Union of India would apply in so far as the enrollment fees are concerned. Here, the issue is with regard to charging of fees for the conduct of the All India Bar Examination. The petitioner should understand that the Bar Council of India would incur huge expenses for the purpose of conducting of such examination and if they are charging ₹3,500 and ₹2,500 respectively… it cannot be termed as violative of any of the provisions of the Constitution of India or any of the provisions of the Advocates Act,” the bench held in its recent order.

The ruling provides clarity on the scope of the BCI’s authority in relation to the AIBE, which law graduates must clear to obtain a certificate of practice. The top court order may also set at rest frequent objections raised by candidates over examination fees, drawing a distinction between statutory limits on enrollment charges and practical expenses involved in professional licensing tests.

The plea, filed by Gandhi in person, questioned the legality of the BCI’s demand of ₹3,500 from general and OBC candidates, and ₹2,500 (along with incidental charges) from scheduled caste and scheduled tribe candidates appearing for the bar exam. Gandhi argued that such a levy was inconsistent with Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, which exhaustively prescribes the fees payable for enrollment as an advocate. He further contended that the BCI’s action infringed Articles 14 (equality before law) and 19(1)(g) (freedom to practice any profession) of the Constitution.

In support, the petitioner cited the Supreme Court’s earlier judgment in Gaurav Kumar, where the Court had held that the BCI cannot impose any additional fees for enrollment apart from what the statute prescribes.

The bench, however, drew a clear distinction between enrollment fees and examination fees. While the 2023 Gaurav Kumar ruling had restricted the BCI from imposing additional charges for enrollment, the judges noted that the conduct of the AIBE was a separate function that involved significant logistical and financial expenditure.

Rejecting the contention that the levy was unconstitutional, the bench held that the AIBE fee was justified in light of the expenses incurred by the BCI in holding the nationwide qualifying exam for advocates.

In the last AIBE conducted in December 2024, around 2.3 lakh students appeared for the nationwide test. This was the most attended edition of the exam in its history, with the number of candidates who appeared rising from 1,44,014 in the previous exam, AIBE 18.