New Delhi: Observing that long-pending elections could resolve concerns over senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra’s continued stint as Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson, the Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed firm dea…

New Delhi: Observing that long-pending elections could resolve concerns over senior advocate Manan Kumar Mishra’s continued stint as Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairperson, the Supreme Court on Wednesday fixed firm deadlines for reconstituting State Bar Councils so that a fresh leadership can take charge soon.A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana was hearing petitions filed by advocates M Varadhan and Yogamaya MG. CJI invite row: Bar Council of India closes proceedings against NALSAR Hyderabad students amid SC rapThe pleas challenged Mishra’s prolonged tenure, sought an audit of the BCI’s finances and the BCI-PEARL FIRST Trust, and questioned the April 2025 notification that purported to extend his term till 2030.The court directed High Court Chief Justices to complete the co-option of two women members to each State Bar Council within two weeks. The councils must then notify their new composition within one week. Newly constituted State Bar Councils have three weeks from that notification to elect their Chairperson, Vice-Chairperson, other office-bearers and the representative to the BCI, the court directed.“The issues raised against Mishra’s continuation can be addressed if the long-due BCI elections are expedited,” the bench observed, adding that it would examine the composition of the BCI only after this process is completed. The matter will next be taken up on September 17 to monitor compliance.The court also recorded an undertaking from the BCI that the Attorney General and Solicitor General — both ex-officio members — will be actively associated with every major policy decision. “Both the Attorney General for India and the Solicitor General for India shall be actively associated with every policy decision taken by the Bar Council of India,” the bench noted.Bar Council of India declares AIBE results; overall pass percentage of 65.92Petitioners argued that Rule 12(2) of the BCI Rules limited the Chairperson’s tenure to two years, and that transitional provisions under the Advocates Act meant to avoid a vacuum were being misused to perpetuate the same leadership. Mishra has held the post almost continuously since 2012, with the latest unopposed election in March 2025 and a Gazette notification extending his term to April 2030.Counsel also raised questions over the BCI-PEARL FIRST Trust created in 2020, which allowed trustees to continue even after they cease to be BCI members, and over the transfer of assets and the setting up of a law university in Goa.The bench indicated that with State Bar Council elections already completed under earlier Supreme Court orders, the practical course was to complete the reconstitution process rather than intervene further at this stage. Counsel for the BCI and Mishra welcomed the timelines while cautioning against mixing separate issues or making broad allegations.The petitions arose against the backdrop of the recent NALSAR controversy, in which Mishra had directed against enrolment of the university’s graduates over objections to the CJI as a convocation guest before later apologising.

Source: Deccan Herald