P L D 1998 Lahore 207 (PLP)

Representation

• Miss HADIA AWAN, ADVOCATE Appellant
• ----(. 7---Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973), Ss.22(1) & 2(a)---Law Reforms' Oftlinance (XII 8f 1972), S.3---Entitlement to appear in competitive examination for recruitment of Civil Judges/Judicial Magistrates, required two years' experience at the Bar--Appellant having no such experience, her application was turned down by Public Service Commission ---Validity--Rule 7 of Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994, prescribes that no person would be appointed to judicial service unless he had practised profession of law for not less than two years---No person in terms of S.22(1) of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 was entitled to practise profession of law unless he was an Advocate---Word "Advocate" has been defined in S.2(a) of the Act as an Advocate entered in any roll under the provisions of Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973---Only that person whose name was borne out from the Register of Advocates, maintained by Bar Council, could claim to have right to practise ---Pupilage which appellant did before her enrolment as Advocate did not entitle her to practise profession of law---Appellant's enrolment being less than two years as Advocate, would not entitle her to appear in competitive examination for recruitment of Civil Judges/Judicial Magistrates.
• Mian Shahid Iqbal, Asstt. A.-G. for Respondents
• 2. Briefly stated the appellant's claim in the Constitutional petition was that she being a law graduate and had worked two years as an Advocate, was entitled to appear in the competitive examination held for recruitment of Civil Judges/Judicial Magistrates pursuant to public notice dated 29-12-1996 but her application was illegally turned down by the Punjab Public Service Commission on the ground that the petitioner did not have two years experience at the Bar. She represented against the said order of the Punjab Public Service Commission was allowed to take the examination and was called for Psychological test, which, however, did not take place and the appellant was finally held to be disqualified from appearing in the examination on account of not having experience for a period of two years as required by the examination rules.
• 3. Before the learned Single Judge the appellant had contended that she having intimated the Punjab Bar Council on 12-2-1994, that she had joined Mr. Niaz Muhammad Khan Lodhi, Advocate as his pupil, started working and after the pupilage she was enrolled by the Punjab Bar Council on 13-11-1995. According to the appellant's learned counsel the appellant has to be given benefit of pupilage while computing the experience.
• 4. This plea was repelled by the learned Single Judge who on review of various provisions of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 and the Pakistan Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976 came to the conclusion that a person can only be deemed to be an Advocate once he has been enrolled as such by the Bar Council and the period spent as pupilage cannot be computed while determining the length of experience at the Bar.
• 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the view taken by the learned Single Judge is unexceptionable. Rule 7 of the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994 prescribes that no person shall be appointed to the judicial service unless he has practised the profession of law for not less than two years. According to section 22(1) of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973, no person is entitled to practise the profession of law unless he is an Advocate. The word "Advocate" has been defined in section 2(a) as an Advocate entered in any roll under the provisions of this Act.
• ?6. It follows from the above that only a person whose name is borne out from the Register as an Advocate, maintained by the Bar Council can claim to have a right to practise. The pupilage which the appellant did before he / enrolment as an Advocate did not entitle her to practise the profession of law. That being so we have no option but to dismiss this appeal. However, from the attending circumstances it is quite obvious that this is a case of great hardship. The appellant has brilliant academic record. She stood first in the F.E.L. Examination and she again stood first among the girls students in the LL.B. Examination and was conferred a gold medal. She has already appeared in the written examination and was also called for interview which was later on cancelled on account of non-compliance with the Rules. We have been informed that 50 posts of Civil Judges/Judicial Magistrates are lying vacant for which the process of selection has commenced. Rule 12 of the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994 empowers the Chief Minister to relax the rules on the recommendation of this Court. The Secretary, Services General Administration E and Information Department, Government of Punjab is directed to place the case of the appellant for consideration under rule 12 of the Punjab Judicial Service Rules, 1994 before the Chief Minister.

Headnotes / Summary

Judgment & Decree