In a significant development, the Gujarat High Court has directed the State Bar Council to issue provisional certificates of practice to two law graduates who completed their LL.B. degrees from an unrecognized institution. This directive enables the graduates to participate in the recruitment process for the position of civil judge. The order, issued by Justice Nirzar S. Desai, stipulates that while the graduates can partake in the selection process, they shall not be appointed until the court resolves the issue concerning the recognition of their alma mater.
The petitioners' counsel informed the court that their clients sought only the opportunity to participate in the recruitment process. They assured the court that even if selected, the petitioners would not claim appointment until the dispute regarding their institution's recognition is settled. This stance underscores the graduates' commitment to resolving the legal ambiguities surrounding their qualifications before assuming any judicial responsibilities.
The crux of the matter lies in the fact that the institution from which the petitioners graduated is not recognized. This institution had previously filed a petition before the high court, which remains pending. The court was apprised that similar petitions have been filed by at least 20 other colleges or their students, highlighting a broader issue affecting numerous law graduates across the state.
In support of their plea, the petitioners referenced the case of Saiyed Mahammadjuber Yunusbhai and others v. Bar Council of Gujarat and others. In that instance, the issue pertained to allowing petitioners to appear in the All India Bar Examination based on provisional certificates issued by the Bar Council of Gujarat. The court permitted the petitioners to take the examination, setting a precedent for provisional accommodations in situations where institutional recognition is under dispute.
The necessity of a certificate of practice was also discussed during the proceedings. Such a certificate serves to confirm whether an individual is a practicing advocate, a requirement evident from the application process outlined in the recruitment advertisement. Applicants must declare the duration of their practice, and the certificate ensures the authenticity of this claim, distinguishing practicing advocates from non-practicing ones.
Justice Desai's order reflects a balanced approach, allowing the petitioners to advance their careers while ensuring that the integrity of the judicial selection process remains intact. By permitting participation in the recruitment process but withholding appointments until the recognition issue is resolved, the court acknowledges the petitioners' rights without compromising legal standards.
This case brings to light the challenges faced by graduates of unrecognized institutions, emphasizing the need for timely resolution of recognition disputes. The outcome of this and similar cases could have far-reaching implications for legal education and the careers of many aspiring lawyers in the region. The court's decision to address the matter with urgency indicates a recognition of its significance within the broader legal and educational landscape.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.