RISHABH DUGGAL & ANR (PETITIONERS)
THE BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA & ANR (RESPONDENTS)
Rules of Legal Education and BCI rules which sets the upper limit of admission of 3 years LLB course at 30 and 5 year course at 20, is been challenged by a 77 year old women.
In this pending matter of supreme court the septuagenarian widow says not only does she seek knowledge of the law, but has also developed a passion for it while defending her late husband’s estate. She approached various law colleges, and was denied admission due to age restrictions imposed by BCI.
According to the applicant, the rules imposed by BCI for age is violative of fundamental right under Article 14 and 21.She avers that the Right to Life includes the right to read, be educated in a medium of instruction, pursue a degree or a course of her choice, notwithstanding the limitation of age.
The applicant states that she is “challenging the validity of Clause 28, Schedule III, Rule 11 of the Rules of Legal Education, 2008 (‘BCI Rules’) and of impugned Circular No. 6 dated 17.09.2016 on grounds of the same being in violation of Article 14 by prescribing an age limit of 20 years and 30 years respectively for admission into the 5- Year and 3-Year LLB Programmes of all law schools throughout India.”
To support her claim, the applicant relies on the judgment passed by the apex court in Francis Coralie Mullin v. Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi wherein it was held that the Right to Life extended beyond ‘animalistic existence’. The fundamental right under Article 21 constitutes the right to live with dignity which includes the right to read, write and receive instructions in a course of choosing, states the applicant accordingly.