BCI Must Respond to Representation Challenging AIBE Fee Structure: Punjab & Haryana HC [Read Order]
Punjab & Haryana High Court directs BCI to decide representation challenging AIBE fee structure within 30 days
![BCI Must Respond to Representation Challenging AIBE Fee Structure: Punjab & Haryana HC [Read Order] BCI Must Respond to Representation Challenging AIBE Fee Structure: Punjab & Haryana HC [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/BCI-Respond-to-Representation-Challenging-Representation-Challenging-AIBE-Fee-Structure-Punjab-Haryana-HC-Punjab-Haryana-HC-taxscan.jpg)
In a recent order, the Punjab & Haryana High Court directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to respond to a representation challenging the fee structure of the All India Bar Examination (AIBE).
The matter arose from a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Tushar Tanwar, a practicing advocate, who challenged the examination fee of Rs. 3,500 (plus incidental charges) for General/OBC candidates and Rs. 2,500 (plus incidental charges) for SC/ST candidates.
Read More: WhatsApp Messages revealed ₹200 crore Tax Evasion: FM responds to Privacy Concerns
The petitioner argued that the BCI lacked the statutory authority under Section 24(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961 to impose such a fee, and that doing so infringed upon Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. He also relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in W.P. (C) No. 352/2023 to support his claim.
Struggling with UAE Corporate Tax Return Filing? Get Expert Guidance Now!, Enroll Now
The PIL litigant submitted a representation to the BCI dated March 2, 2025, seeking redress on the issue but the BCI had not taken any action on the representation. So, the litigant filed this writ petition.
Read More: Last Chance to Correct Your Taxes: File Updated ITR by March 31, 2025 to Avoid Higher Penalties
At the hearing, the High Court declined to get into the merits of the challenge but took cognizance of the pending representation. The bench comprising Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel directed the BCI to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation within thirty days of receiving the court’s order and to pass a reasoned (speaking) order.
The court explained the procedural fairness and accountability, leaving the substantive questions regarding the legality of the AIBE fee open for future adjudication. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates