Supreme Court Seeks BCI Reply on Fresh Challenge to 3-Year Ban on New Law Colleges
The Supreme Court of India has sought a response from the Bar Council of India (BCI) on a new petition challenging its decision to impose a three-year ban on opening new law colleges across the country.
A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta issued notice in the matter and fixed the next hearing for January 30. The petition has been filed by Vocation Education Foundation (VEF), a society that claims it had started the approval process much before the moratorium was announced in August 2025.
The challenge relates to the Rules of Legal Education, Moratorium (Three-Year Moratorium) with respect to Centres of Legal Education, 2025. A similar petition filed earlier by advocate Jatin Sharma is already pending before the Court.
The BCI introduced the moratorium stating that it was necessary to control the rapid growth of substandard law colleges and to protect the quality of legal education. As per a BCI press release dated August 13, 2025, even existing law colleges cannot start new courses, sections, or batches during this three-year period without prior approval.
According to VEF, it had planned to start 3-year LLB and 5-year BA LLB programmes at IEC Law College from the academic year 2025–26. The society says it applied on February 12, 2025, seeking login credentials to submit its online application, but the BCI did not act on the request.
The moratorium rules clarify that institutions with applications already submitted and pending would not be affected. However, VEF argues that it could not submit its application only because the BCI failed to provide access to the online portal. A second request made in December 2025, for starting courses in the 2026–27 academic year, also received no response.
VEF has stated that it has adequate infrastructure, finances, and administrative support, along with affiliation from Chaudhary Charan Singh University, to run a law college.
The petition claims that the blanket moratorium is arbitrary as it does not distinguish between well-equipped institutions and substandard ones. It further argues that the ban violates the right to equality under Article 14, the right to practise any occupation under Article 19, and the right to education under Article 21 of the Constitution.
VEF has also questioned whether the BCI has the legal authority to impose such a ban. It argues that the Advocates Act, 1961 does not give the BCI the power to prohibit the opening of new law colleges, making the moratorium illegal and beyond its powers.
