In a landmark development, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has recently issued a notice in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by Advocates Vivek Tiwari and Abhishek Malhotra. The PIL seeks standardized stipend and remuneration guidelines from the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh. This legal battle unfolds against the backdrop of financial disparities faced by young advocates and law interns, prompting a closer examination of the fundamental rights and professional standards in the legal profession. In this overview, we delve into the court’s directive, key requests in the PIL, legal arguments presented, the lack of formal regulations, and the court’s decision, all shaping a narrative advocating for fair Minimum Remuneration Guidelines in the legal realm.
Punjab & Haryana High Court Issues Notice to BCI Regarding Plea for Minimum Remuneration Guidelines for Young Advocates and Law Interns
Overview
The Punjab & Haryana High Court recently issued notice on a significant legal plea. Advocates Vivek Tiwari and Abhishek Malhotra filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL), seeking standardized stipend and remuneration guidelines from the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh.
Court’s Directive
Moreover, the court, led by Acting Chief Justice Ritu Bahri and Justice Nidhi Gupta, directed the petitioners to submit the Kerala Government’s scheme, allowing eligible lawyers to receive a stipend/remuneration.
Key Requests in the PIL
In addition, the PIL urges the BCI and the regional Bar Council to establish Minimum Remuneration Guidelines for a minimum stipend of Rs.15,000 for young advocates and Rs.5,000 for law interns.
Furthermore, the PIL highlights the significant disparities between the basic minimum wage for unskilled laborers (Rs.12,623) and the meager payments received by educated and skilled law graduates (Rs.5,000 to Rs.7,000).
Legal Arguments
Nonetheless, the PIL argues against financial exploitation and the violation of fundamental rights under Article 21 by restricting junior advocates from filing independent matters.
Similarly, the petitioners compare the situation with other professional bodies like Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Doctors, where regulations ensure minimum remuneration for new members.
Lack of Formal Regulations
Consequently, they contend that the lack of formal regulations or notifications regarding the minimum remuneration for newly enrolled advocates is a failure on the part of the BCI and other bar councils.
Court’s Decision
Meanwhile, the Court deferred the matter to April 23, requesting the petitioners to submit the Kerala Government’s scheme for reference.
Read More
- List of Courts in Tamil Nadu
- Poonamallee Criminal Bar Association 40/91 – 2023 Election
- Championing Leadership and Legal Excellence: Mohanakrishnan’s Third Term Victory at MHAA
Conclusion
In conclusion, the PIL sheds light on the pressing need for standardized remuneration guidelines in the legal profession, addressing disparities and advocating for the rights of young advocates and law interns.
Case Title: Vivek Tiwari and another v. Bar Council of India and another
0 Comments