The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice on a writ petition challenging Chapter III of the Bar Council of India (BCI) Election Rules, 2016, which bars office bearers of District and High Court Bar Associations from contesting State Bar Council elections.

The petition highlights that while the 2016 Rules disqualify office bearers of District and High Court Bar Associations from contesting, they simultaneously permit office bearers of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) to participate—creating, according to the petitioners, an unreasonable and discriminatory distinction.

A Bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi issued the notice, with Justice Kant observing that the matter “requires consideration.” However, the Court declined to grant interim relief, noting that the petitioners had challenged the Rules only now—nearly a decade later—due to the upcoming Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh elections scheduled for January 2026.

Senior Advocate P.B. Suresh, appearing for the petitioners, urged that the nominations of the office bearers of the petitioner Bar Association be accepted for the forthcoming elections. The Bench, however, refused to interfere at this stage.

Filed by the District Bar Association, Bulandshahr, and its President, the plea contends that the impugned provision violates Articles 14 and 19(1)(c) of the Constitution by granting a “special privilege” to SCBA office bearers while denying similar rights to other Bar Association leaders across the country. The petitioners further submitted that the rule should be “read down” to allow participation of District and High Court Bar Association office bearers, with an option to relinquish their posts post-election.

“It is arbitrary to extend exceptional treatment to advocates practising before this Hon’ble Court while denying equal opportunity to those practising before subordinate courts and High Courts,” the plea asserts.

The petition notes that in a meeting held on October 31, 2025, the executive body of the Bulandshahr Bar Association unanimously resolved that the BCI restriction was unconstitutional. The President of the Association, who is the second petitioner, intends to contest the forthcoming Bar Council elections but stands disqualified under the 2016 Rules.

Appearance: Sr. Adv. P.B. Suresh, AOR Aishwarya Singh, Advs. Sughosh Subramanyam, Sanskriti Samal, and Deeksha Gupta appeared for the petitioners.

Case Title: District Bar Association Bulandshahr & Anr. v. Bar Council of India & Anr., W.P.(C) No. 1097/2025