In a dramatic turn of events, the Bar Council of India (BCI) on Thursday evening withdrew its order freezing the enrolment of the entire 2026 graduating batch of NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, just hours after directing all state bar councils not to enrol any student from the batch pending an inquiry into a campaign opposing Chief Justice of India Surya Kant’s participation in the university’s convocation.
The university had confirmed that Justice Kant had been invited as chief guest, although the convocation dates had not yet been finalised and it was awaiting a response to the invitation. The Act contemplates an individualised determination of eligibility or disqualification, not collective punishment of an entire graduating batch. Experts say that Section 48B’s supervisory power over state bar councils cannot be used to create a new ground of disqualification or a power to indefinitely suspend enrolment which Parliament has not conferred. The first order had sought an authenticated report from the university identifying those who had initiated, organised, coordinated or mobilised the campaign against the CJI’s proposed participation in the convocation. It had also sought details of representations, signatories, meetings, social-media groups, media interactions and any calls for boycott or disruption, besides information on the involvement of faculty members, research scholars, alumni, student organisations or outsiders. The amended order now makes clear that the blanket restraint will not continue. The controversy arose after a section of NALSAR students opposed the proposed participation of CJI Kant as chief guest at the university’s convocation. Students from several subsequent batches later expressed solidarity with the representation. The students’ objections followed remarks made by CJI Kant in the Supreme Court while dealing with a plea concerning alleged police excesses during student protests in Delhi.
To be sure, the Advocates Act, 1961 leaves no room for a blanket freeze of enrolment by an administrative order of the BCI chairman. Sections 24 and 24A prescribe eligibility and disqualifications, while Sections 25 and 26 lay down the statutory process for enrolment and consideration of any refusal. The first representation was submitted on July 23 by 70 members of the outgoing LLB batch.
The quick reversal came within hours of the BCI’s first communication, also dated August 13, in which Mishra had directed all state bar councils not to enrol any student who obtained a law degree from NALSAR in 2026 “till further orders”. “No student shall be made to suffer without any fault on his part,” Mishra said.
