Executive Summary:
This notification from the Supreme Court of India announces the next Advocates-on-Record Examination to be held on June 3-6, 2014, in New Delhi. It specifies eligibility criteria, application procedures and deadlines, and changes to the examination syllabus, including a paper on Advocacy Professional Ethics. The deadline for applications is May 1, 2014.
Key Points / Main Content:
Examination Details:
* The Advocates-on-Record Examination will be held on June 3-6, 2014, at the Supreme Court Premises in New Delhi.
Eligibility:
* Advocates completing one year of continuous training on or before April 30, 2014, are eligible to appear for the examination.
Application Process:
* Application forms can be obtained from the office of the Secretary, Board of Examiners, during working hours.
* Completed applications must reach the Secretary, Board of Examiners, by May 1, 2014.
* Late applications will not be accepted.
* Acceptance of the application is contingent upon producing the requisite training certificate from an Advocate-on-Record.
Syllabus Change:
* Paper III will cover Advocacy Professional Ethics, with maximum marks of 100.
Leading Cases:
* A list of leading cases for Paper IV ('Leading Cases') is provided in Annexure A.
Re-evaluation and Representation:
* Requests for re-evaluation of answer sheets will not be entertained.
* Other application/representation seeking relief will not be entertained beyond 30 days from the result declaration date.
Absenteeism:
* Candidates absent without reasonable written explanation may face consequences under Regulation 5 b, potentially including restrictions on future examinations.
* Show cause notices may be issued to absentees.
Examination Attempts:
* Candidates failing all papers in a year will not be permitted to appear in the subsequent examination.
* A candidate is allowed a maximum of five attempts to pass the examination.
Impact Analysis:
Advocates:
Impact: Those completing required training by April 30, 2014, are eligible to take the Advocates-on-Record Examination. Changes to the syllabus and restrictions on exam attempts affect preparation and future eligibility.
Action Required: Eligible advocates must obtain and submit the application form by May 1, 2014, ensuring all requirements, including the training certificate, are met. They must also prepare for the revised syllabus, including Paper III on Advocacy Professional Ethics, and review the list of leading cases for Paper IV.
Advocates-on-Record (Providing Training):
Impact: Responsible for providing training and certification to eligible advocates.
Action Required: Provide the necessary training certificates to their trainees by the application deadline.
Board of Examiners:
Impact: Responsible for conducting the examination and evaluating candidates.
Action Required: Ensure the examination is conducted according to the updated rules and syllabus, including the new Paper III. They must also process applications, manage absenteeism according to the new guidelines, and handle any representations within the specified timeframe.
Key Entities Referenced
Supreme Court of India: The apex court of India, which issued the notification regarding the Advocates-on-Record Examination.
New Delhi: The location where the Advocates-on-Record Examination will be held and also place of notification.
Supreme Court Rules, 1966: The set of rules governing the procedures and practices of the Supreme Court of India, specifically Order IV Rule 5(i) and (ii).
Regulations regarding Advocates-on-Record Examination: The regulations that govern the Advocates-on-Record Examination, including eligibility criteria and examination procedures.
Advocates-on-Record Examination: The examination conducted by the Supreme Court of India to qualify advocates as Advocates-on-Record.
Board of Examiners: The body responsible for conducting and overseeing the Advocates-on-Record Examination.
Vijay Dhanji Chaudhary Vs. Suhas Jayant Natwadkar: A case referenced in the notification, which led to a change in the examination syllabus, specifically the inclusion of 'Advocacy Professional Ethics' as Paper III.
State of Karnataka: One of the states mentioned in the list of leading cases in Annexure A (T. M. A Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka).
jftLVªh laö Mhö ,yö&33004@99 REGD. NO. D. L.-33004/99
vlk/kj.k
EXTRAORDINARY
Hkkx II—[k.M 3—mi&[k.M (i)
PART II—Section 3—Sub-section (i)
izkf/dkj ls izdkf'kr
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
la- 197] ubZ fnYyh] 'kqØokj] vizSy 4] 2014@pS=k 14] 1936
No. 197] NEW DELHI, FRIDAY, APRIL 4, 2014/CHAITRA 14, 1936
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 2nd April, 2014
G.S.R. 267(E).—Under Rule 5 (i) and (ii) of Order IV, Supreme Court Rules, 1966 (as amended) and
Regulation (2) of the Regulations regarding Advocates-on-Record Examination made thereunder governing the
Examination for Advocates-on-Record, it is hereby notified for the information of all concerned that the next
Examination for the Advocates-on-Record will be held in the Supreme Court Premises, New Delhi on 3rd, 4th, 5th and
6th June, 2014.
2. All Advocates who will be completing one year's continuous training on or before 30th April, 2014 are
eligible to appear for the aforesaid examination.
3. Applications should reach the Secretary, Board of Examiners, by 1st May, 2014. The application forms
may be obtained from the office of Secretary on any working day during office hours. No application shall be accepted
after 1st May, 2014.
4. Acceptance of the application is subject to production of requisite certificate to training from an
Advocate-on-Record under Regulation (6) of the Regulations regarding Advocates-on-Record Examination.
5. In pursuance of the directions contained in the Order dated October 12, 2011 passed by Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in I.A. No. 2 of 2009 in SLP ( C) No. 18481 of 2009 titled Vijay Dhanji Chaudhary Vs. Suhas Jayant
Natwadkar, and as decided by the Competent Authority, pending the amendment to the Regulations regarding
Advocates-on-Record Examination, Paper-III for this year shall be “Advocacy & Professional Ethics” with
maximum marks of 100.
6. A list of leading Cases with regard to Paper-IV 'Leading Cases' is appended to this Notification as
Annexure 'A'.
7. No application/representation in the nature of seeking relief for re-evaluation of answer sheets shall be
entertained. Application/representation seeking relief other than in the nature of re-evaluation shall not be entertained
beyond a period of 30 days from the date of declaration of the result.
8. In ensuing examinations those who are given roll numbers and who absent themselves in examination
without informing reasonable reasons in writing will be treated as not sufficiently prepared & will be dealt with under
1547 GI/2014 (1)2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART II—SEC. 3(i)]
Regulation 5 (b) without giving further opportunity & time may be prescribed within which they shall not appear again
for examination without prior permission of The Board of Examiners. It has been further decided that all such
candidates who remain absent without reasonable cause, may be issued show cause notice to explain why their case
shall not be placed before the Board of Examiners for appropriate order.
9. The candidates are further informed that the Committee of Hon'ble Judges of the Examination Committee
on the recommendation of the Board of Examiners have decided that a candidate who fails in all the papers of
Advocate-on-Record Examination held in an year shall not be permitted to appear in the ensuing examination. It
was further decided that a candidate may be allowed five chances to appear at the examination, and those who do not
qualify in the desired five chances given, shall not be permitted to appear in any further examination.
[F. No. AOR Exam/June/2014]
M. K. HANJURA, Registrar & Secy. Board of Examiners
'ANNEXURE-A'
REVISED LIST OF LEADING CASES
1. T. M. A Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) 8 SCC 481: AIR 2003 SC 355
2. P. A. Inamdar v. State of Maharashtra: 2004 (8) SCC 139
3. Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) 3 SCC 625
4. S. R. Bommai v. UOI: 1994 (3) SCC 1
5. L. Chandra Kumar v. UOI: 1995 (1) SCC 400
6. Supreme Court Advocate-on-record Association v. UOI 1993 (4) SCC 441
7. Samsher Singh v. State of Punjab: 1974 (2) SCC 831
8. Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa: 1978 (2) SCC 213
9. Maneka Gandhi v. UOI: 1978 (1) SCC 248
10. A. R. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak: 1988 (2) SCC 602
11. Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra: 2002 (4) SCC 388
12. Indra Sawhney v. UOI: 1992 Supp (3) SCC 217
13. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan: 1997 (6) SCC 241
14. Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology: 2002 (5) SCC 111
15. SBP & Co. v. Patel Engg. Ltd.: 2005 (8) SCC 618
16. I. R Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu: 2007 (2) SCC 1
17. Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. UOI: 2008 (6) SCC 1
18. CBSE v. Aditya Bandopadhyay: 2011 (8) SCC 497
19. Swamy Shraddananda (2) v. State of Karnataka: 2008 (13) SCC 767
20. Nandini Sundar v. State of Chattisgarh: 2011 (13) SCC 46
21. Selvi v. State of Karnataka: 2010 (7) SCC 263
22. Amarinder Singh v. Punjab Vidhan Sabha: 2010 (6) SCC 113
23. State of West Bengal v. Committee for the Protection of Democratic Rights: 2010 (3) SCC 571
24. Kihota Hollohan v. Zachillhu: 1992 Supp (2) SCC 651
25. Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. UOI: 2012 (2) SCALE 180
26. In re: Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 2012 (10) SCC 1
27. Mafatalal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India, (1997) 5 SCC 536
28. Vodafone International Holdings BV v. Union of India, (2012) 6 SCC 613
29. Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 4 SCC 158
30. Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee, (2009) 9 SCC 221
31. M. Nagaraj v. Union of India (2006) 8 SCC 212¹Hkkx IIµ[k.M 3 (i)º Hkkjr dk jkti=k % vlk/kj.k 3
32. Aruna Ramachandra Shanbhaug v. Union of India (2011) 4 SCC 454
33. Sangeet v. State of Haryana (2013) 2 SCC 45
34. Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 1
35. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India 1982 (2) SCR 365
36. Kharak Singh 1964 (1) SCR 332
37. D. K. Basu v. State of West Bengal 1997 (1) SCC 416
38. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India 1996 (5) SCC 647
39. Naga People’s Movements of Human Rights v. UOI 1998 (2) SCC 109
40. State of Maharashtra v. Sangharaj Damodar Ruparwate 2010 (7) SCC 398
41. Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation 1989 (4) SCC 155
42. Ms. Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India 1999 (2) SCC 228
43. Danial Latifi v. Union of India 2001 (7) SCC 740
44. D.S. Nakara v. Union of India 1983 (1) SCC 305
Printed by the Manager, Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.