Supreme Court plea seeks removal of BCI chief Manan Kumar Mishra, fresh election

E-PaperSubscribeSubscribeEnjoy unlimited accessSubscribe Now! Get features like A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking the removal of Manan Kumar Mishra as Chairman of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and challenging the notification extending his tenure for a five-year period, even though BCI Rules cap the chairman’s tenure at two years. Supreme Court plea challenges BCI chief Manan Kumar Mishra’s continued tenure, alleging violation of rules and seeking his removal, financial probe and fresh polls.The plea, filed by advocate MG Yogamaya, also seeks an interim direction to set up an independent administrative committee to run the affairs of the BCI in the event of his removal. It further demands the constitution of an independent, judge-headed committee to examine the finances and appointments made by the BCI. The petition comes against the backdrop of the recent controversy surrounding Mishra’s decision to refuse enrolment to NALSAR University of Law’s graduating batch following the controversy over their reported objection to having Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant at their convocation ceremony. Mishra directed all state bar councils not to enrol the students but later withdrew his order while initiating an inquiry into allegations that some teachers and outsiders had instigated the students. However, the BCI chairman got a rap from the CJI himself, who questioned what business he had to issue such a directive. The episode ended on August 15, when Mishra issued an apology letter, sincerely regretting his words or actions that may have hurt the students in any manner. Following this episode, lawyer bodies demanded Mishra’s removal, followed by protests by lawyers outside the BCI office. The plea states that it is not directed against the removal of any individual but challenges structural illegality, alleged concentration of institutional control, prolonged concentration of statutory power, violation of mandatory statutory provisions governing tenure and elections, arbitrary exercise of regulatory authority, absence of transparency and accountability, and failure to preserve the representative democratic character contemplated under the Advocates Act, 1961. It questions the uninterrupted continuation of Mishra at the helm of the regulating body overseeing the legal profession and legal education in the country, citing Rule 12(2) of the BCI Rules, which caps the chairman’s tenure at two years. Contrary to this, it questions the continuation of Mishra from 2014, followed by a Gazette notification in April 2025 extending his term to 2030. The notification also extends the term of the BCI vice chairman, whose continuation has also been challenged. The petition said, “The issues raised transcend the personal continuance of Respondent No. 3 (Mishra) and concern the constitutional integrity of a statutory regulator exercising extensive coercive, disciplinary, educational and financial powers over the legal profession.” The petition has also sought a probe into the BCI Trust “PEARL-FIRST” and All India Bar Examination finances and sought the conduct of a fresh election in a time-bound manner under the supervision of the court.