'Will Not Step Down Simply': Manan Mishra Defends Seventh BCI Term Amid Growing Resignation Calls

New Delhi: Manan Kumar Mishra, Chairman of the Bar Council of India and Rajya Sabha MP, has defended his continued tenure at the helm of the statutory body, claiming that he was chosen by BCI members on multiple occasions.  

Mishra's seventh term has come under further scrutiny, with a case filed in the Supreme Court challenging his extended tenure and seeking his dismissal, new elections, and a limit on the number of periods a person can serve as BCI chairman.

Mishra addressed the controversy by stating that the BCI was founded under the Advocates Act, a Parliament-enacted law, and that the legislation does not limit the chairman's tenure.

“Bar Council of India is a statutory body under the Advocates Act. It’s an act created by Parliament. Now the act does not limit any sort of restriction on the tenure of the chairman. Therefore under the act I have been elected. This is my seventh tenure," Mishra said.

He also pointed to his earlier terms, saying he had been elected unanimously on six previous occasions. “For last six tenures I have been being elected as the chairman of the Bar Council of India unanimously," he said.

Why Is Mishra Facing Pressure To Step Down?

The latest controversy developed as lawyers from various Bar Associations in Delhi gathered outside the BCI headquarters to demand Mishra's resignation. The protesters expressed various issues, including his lengthy tenure, the lack of meaningful advocate welfare measures, the failure to establish an Advocate Protection Act, and a proposed rise in the registration price for lawyers at State Bar Councils.

Mishra, however, rejected the demand for his resignation and argued that his mandate comes from the legal fraternity. “I have served as the Chairman of the Bar Council of India for 12 to 14 years because I was elected. Manan Mishra represents 25 lakh lawyers; he will not step down simply," he said.

The protest has also generated support for Mishra. Advocate Satyam Singh stated that an elected BCI chairman cannot be removed solely because a group of attorneys wants it. He stated that Mishra represents around 2.5 million lawyers and has been re-elected to the position on multiple occasions.

NALSAR Row Adds Another Layer To The Dispute 

Mishra also discussed the recent dispute between students at NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad and the Chief Justice of India, who also serves as the university's Chancellor. He criticized students for boycotting the CJI and skipping the convocation.

Mishra stated that the BCI initially issued an order stating that the students' enrollment would not be processed, but the order was removed within 15 minutes when their complaints were resolved. 

“Lately, there has been a lot of irresponsible and absurd commentary circulating on social media. Students from NALSAR University, Hyderabad, decided to boycott the Chief Justice of India - who is also their Chancellor - and refused to attend the convocation ceremony where he was to preside," Mishra said.

“As the Chairman of the Bar Council of India, I found this deeply objectionable," he added.

“Within 15 minutes, that order was revoked, and the students' grievances were addressed," he said.

Mishra claimed that the incident was then utilized by members of the Aam Aadmi Party and a group he referred to as the "CJP group" to demand his resignation. He further stated that some 15 students had gathered outside the BCI office late on Thursday, demanding that he stand down.

Advocate Satyam Singh defended the BCI's first response, stating that the decision was intended to reinforce respect for legal institutions, but that the order was eventually revoked after Mishra admitted it was issued in haste.

Fresh Allegations Over BCI Functioning

The pressure on Mishra has also been fueled by charges from BCI Co-Chairman Y.R. Sadashiva Reddy, who has asked for his resignation and voiced concerns about nominations, financial dealings, and the operation of the BCI and its trust.

Mishra has called the claims "false and baseless" and labeled Reddy as a political opponent. Meanwhile, lawyers protesting Mishra's term have expressed broader issues regarding legal professionals' welfare policies. Advocate Raman Sharma claimed that despite Mishra's extended tenure, the BCI failed to implement a comprehensive national welfare system for attorneys.

Advocate Umesh Kumar emphasized the lack of a national insurance system and opposed the proposed rise in enrollment costs to Rs 22,500. Another demonstrator, advocate Perdeep Nagar, called for increased verification of lawyers' credentials and greater concern for advocates' well-being.

The topic of Mishra's term, however, remains central to the dispute. While the Supreme Court petition cites Rule 12(2) of the BCI Rules, which calls for a two-year tenure for the chairman and vice-chairman, Mishra claims that the Advocates Act does not impose a cap.

For the time being, Mishra's position remains unchanged: he claims to have been elected, to represent around 25 lakh lawyers, and has no reason to retire because of the protests.