Singaram R v. The Bar Council Of India Represented By Its Secretary

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 02/04/2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN R.Singaram ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Bar Council of India, Rep. by its Secretary, No.21, Rouse Avenue, Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi-110 002.

2. The Secretary, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Bar Council, Chennai High Court Campus, Chennai-600 104.

... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to conduct the petitioner's enrollment without insisting the production of his original S.S.L.C mark statement based on his representation dated 05.03.2026.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sankar For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Laxman, Standing Counsel

ORDER

(Judgment of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) The prayer in this writ petition is to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to conduct the petitioner's enrollment without insisting the production of his original S.S.L.C mark statement based on his representation dated 05.03.2026. 2.

The case of the petitioner is that he completed SSLC in the academic year 1968-1969 and thereafter completed PUC in 1969-1970 and joined U.G degree in Tamil Literature, however, discontinued the same. Thereafter, the petitioner joined B.Sc(Maths) and completed the same in the year 1974 and joined police service in 1974. After retirement from the police service, the petitioner joined the law course in 2015 at a Bangalore Law College which comes under the jurisdiction of Karanataka State Law University and completed the said law degree in 2/5

2018. Thereafter, he applied for enrollment as advocate before the 2nd respondent on 03.07.2025 and produced all the required documents except his SSLC mark statement since it was lost. Despite the petitioner produced the photocopy of his SSLC mark statement, the 2nd respondent insisted the petitioner to produce the original SSLC mark statement for enrollment. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 3.

Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that since the petitioner has completed law degree from a college which comes under the Karnataka State Law University, the respondents are verifying the credentials of the petitioner and after such verification, enrollment will be done.

4.

Let the respondents conduct an enquiry and if they found that the petitioner has actually completed SSLC apart from satisfying all the requirements for enrollment, the respondents shall ensure that the petitioner is enrolled as an advocate as per law. 3/5

5.

With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] 06.04.2026 Index : Yes / No : Yes / No bala To

1. The Secretary, Bar Council of India, No.21, Rouse Avenue, Institutional Area, Near Bal Bhawan, New Delhi-110 002.

2. The Secretary, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Bar Council, Chennai High Court Campus, Chennai-600 104.

4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

bala 06.04.2026 5/5