Srinagar, September 4, 2025
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has held that an advocate who has applied for an absolute (final) licence of practice cannot be denied the same merely because he later joined government service, if the delay in processing the application is attributable to the Bar Council.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Javed Iqbal Wani and Justice Moksha Khajuria Kazmi quashed the cancellation of a provisional licence issued to petitioner John Mohammad Wani, ruling that the Bar Council’s inaction and delay could not be used to penalise the advocate.
The Court noted that the petitioner had filed his application for an absolute licence in October 2022, well before his selection and appointment as a Prosecuting Officer in the Government of Jammu & Kashmir. However, the application remained pending for more than five months with the State Bar Council.
In a strongly worded observation, the Bench stated:
“Since the petitioner had submitted an application for issuance of Absolute/Final License before the date of his selection and appointment, the reasonable prognosis was that the petitioner should get his Absolute/Final License. The issuance of the license was delayed only because of respondent no. 1, and the petitioner cannot be held accountable for that delay.”
The Court further added that the impugned cancellation order and notification were “unreasonable to say the least,” as the petitioner’s application had been validly filed much before his entry into government service.
Background of the Case
• The petitioner was provisionally enrolled in 2019 under Enrolment No. JK-664/2019.
• He applied for an absolute licence in October 2022, after obtaining his LL.B. degree.
• On March 27, 2023, he was appointed as a Prosecuting Officer through the J&K Public Service Commission.
• Instead of granting the licence, the Bar Council rejected his application in August 2024 and cancelled his provisional licence, citing non-disclosure of his government service.
• The rejection was formalised through Notification No. 1677 of 2024 RG/LP dated August 5, 2024, issued by the Registrar General of the High Court of J&K and Ladakh acting on the recommendation of the Enrolment Committee.
Arguments Advanced
• For the Petitioner:
Senior Advocate Syed Faisal Qadri, assisted by Mariya Ashraf, argued that the delay in granting the licence was entirely due to the Bar Council, not the petitioner. They pointed out that Rule 49 of the Bar Council of India Rules only prohibits salaried employees from practicing law after joining service, but does not retrospectively invalidate a pending application.
• For the Respondents:
Counsel Shah Aamir contended that the petitioner had failed to disclose his government employment and that this justified the rejection of his application for an absolute licence.
The Division Bench held that while the petitioner could not continue to practice law after joining government service, there was no basis to retrospectively cancel his licence. Instead, the Bar Council should have simply treated him as an advocate up to the date of his appointment in government service.
The Court ruled:
“The respondent no. 1 is directed to treat the petitioner to be on the rolls of the State Bar Council of Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir from the date of his enrolment dated 31.12.2019 till his date of appointment i.e. 27.03.2023.”
Accordingly, the impugned order and notification cancelling his licence were set aside.
Cause Title
John Mohammad Wani vs Bar Council of Jammu and Kashmir through Registrar General & Anr.
Appearance:
• For the Petitioner: Syed Faisal Qadri, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Mariya Ashraf, Advocate
• For the Respondents: Mr. Shah Aamir, Advocate
