Headnotes
Surendra Khinchi, a 2025 law graduate of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur, challenged the delay in processing his application for enrolment as an advocate with the Bar Council of Rajasthan (BCR). The BCR explained that enrolment work had been suspended during its election process, with an ad-hoc committee constituted in February 2026 subsequently cancelled in March 2026. The Rajasthan High Court held that with the Bar Council's election process now complete and results declared, continued delay in processing enrolment applications was unjustified and was adversely affecting applicants' right to livelihood, and directed the BCR to dispose of all pending applications by September 9, 2026, invoking its power under Section 58 of the Advocates Act, 1961 to intervene if the Bar Council failed to act.
Key Takeaways
- Administrative disruption from a Bar Council's own election process is not an open-ended justification for delaying advocate-enrolment applications once that process is complete.
- Delay in processing enrolment applications was treated as directly implicating a law graduate's right to livelihood, not merely an internal administrative matter.
- Section 58 of the Advocates Act, 1961 gives the High Court a lever to compel a State Bar Council to act on pending enrolments within a fixed deadline.
Full Judgment Text
The Rajasthan High Court has directed the Bar Council of Rajasthan to dispose of all pending advocate-enrolment applications by September 9, 2026, holding that continued delay was adversely affecting law graduates' right to livelihood.
FACTS:
Surendra Khinchi, a 2025 law graduate of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur, had an application for enrolment as an advocate pending before the Bar Council of Rajasthan (BCR). He submitted that the delay was causing him "considerable hardships" and adversely affecting his right to commence legal practice and earn a livelihood. Counsel for the BCR explained that enrolment work had been suspended during the Council's election process, that an ad-hoc committee constituted in February 2026 to handle pending matters had itself been cancelled in March 2026, and that this had left a backlog of applications.
COURT'S ANALYSIS:
Justice Shubha Mehta acknowledged the disruption caused by the Bar Council's election process but held that with the election "completed and the results also declared," there was no continuing justification for the delay. The Court found that the pending status of numerous similar applications was "adversely affecting their right to livelihood," and that the Bar Council could no longer treat its internal election process as a reason to withhold action on enrolment.
HOLDING:
The Bar Council of Rajasthan was directed to dispose of all applications for enrolment pending as of the date of the order on or before September 9, 2026, and to notify the concerned candidates accordingly, with the Court noting that continued inaction could invite intervention under Section 58 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Source: LiveLaw, "Rajasthan High Court Directs State Bar Council To Clear Pending Advocate Enrolment Applications, Cites Livelihood Concerns," September 8, 2026.
FACTS:
Surendra Khinchi, a 2025 law graduate of Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Law University, Jaipur, had an application for enrolment as an advocate pending before the Bar Council of Rajasthan (BCR). He submitted that the delay was causing him "considerable hardships" and adversely affecting his right to commence legal practice and earn a livelihood. Counsel for the BCR explained that enrolment work had been suspended during the Council's election process, that an ad-hoc committee constituted in February 2026 to handle pending matters had itself been cancelled in March 2026, and that this had left a backlog of applications.
COURT'S ANALYSIS:
Justice Shubha Mehta acknowledged the disruption caused by the Bar Council's election process but held that with the election "completed and the results also declared," there was no continuing justification for the delay. The Court found that the pending status of numerous similar applications was "adversely affecting their right to livelihood," and that the Bar Council could no longer treat its internal election process as a reason to withhold action on enrolment.
HOLDING:
The Bar Council of Rajasthan was directed to dispose of all applications for enrolment pending as of the date of the order on or before September 9, 2026, and to notify the concerned candidates accordingly, with the Court noting that continued inaction could invite intervention under Section 58 of the Advocates Act, 1961.
Source: LiveLaw, "Rajasthan High Court Directs State Bar Council To Clear Pending Advocate Enrolment Applications, Cites Livelihood Concerns," September 8, 2026.
Cases Cited & References
- 1. 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 366