The BCI's Rules of Legal Education, 2008 had prescribed an upper age limit of 20 years for general-category candidates seeking admission to five-year integrated law courses, with a five-year relaxation for certain reserved categories.
The rules also prescribed a 30-year upper limit for the three-year law course, with a similar relaxation.
The age restrictions have since been the subject of litigation for several years.
However, after subsequent litigation, the BCI revived the age restrictions through a September 2016 circular.
The plea before the Supreme Court raised, among other questions, whether the statutory power to regulate legal education and prescribe qualifications can be used by the BCI to impose an upper age limit on admission to law courses.
The BCI's Rules of Legal Education, 2008 had prescribed an upper age limit of 20 years for general-category candidates seeking admission to five-year integrated law courses, with a five-year relaxation for certain reserved categories. The rules also prescribed a 30-year upper limit for the three-year law course, with a similar relaxation.
The age restrictions have since been the subject of litigation for several years.
The BCI had earlier withdrawn Clause 28 of Schedule III of its 2008 Rules (the provision prescribing the age limit) in 2013, after a one-man committee found that the restriction violated Article 14 (equality before law).
However, after subsequent litigation, the BCI revived the age restrictions through a September 2016 circular.
The validity of the restrictions has since been challenged before different courts.
The plea before the Supreme Court raised, among other questions, whether the statutory power to regulate legal education and prescribe qualifications can be used by the BCI to impose an upper age limit on admission to law courses.
