Archive · 3 Sep 2026
Supreme Court Limits Manan Mishra’s BCI Role Until Elections
The Supreme Court said Manan Kumar Mishra is temporarily leading the Bar Council of India.
This temporary role is called pro tem.
He can manage everyday work until new elections create a new Council.
The court said he should not be treated like a chairman chosen through a current democratic election.
Important policy decisions should also include the Attorney General and Solicitor General.
Lawyers had challenged Mishra’s continued tenure and a decision extending it until 2030.
The court said newly formed State Bar Councils must quickly choose their leaders and representatives.
The judges also asked questions about a BCI trust whose trustees were described as permanent.
The controversy followed, among other issues, a BCI decision involving enrollment of NALSAR graduates that was later withdrawn.
The Supreme Court said Manan Kumar Mishra may remain BCI chairperson only in a pro tem capacity until fresh elections.
The court limited the existing BCI arrangement to day-to-day administration and said major policy decisions should involve the Attorney General and Solicitor General.
Petitioners challenged Mishra’s continued tenure and an April 2025 notification extending the chairman and vice-chairman’s terms until 2030.
Newly constituted State Bar Councils must elect office-bearers and BCI representatives within three weeks after their composition is notified.
The bench questioned whether elected BCI members could make themselves permanent trustees of a BCI-created trust and raised financial-transparency concerns.
- Who
- The Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, heard petitions involving BCI Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra.
- What
- The court characterized Mishra’s position as pro tem, limited the existing arrangement to routine functioning, and required consultation with the Attorney General and Solicitor General on policy decisions.
- When
- The hearing took place on Wednesday, September 2; the reports identify April 2025 as the date of the challenged notification.
- Where
- The matter was heard by the Supreme Court in New Delhi.
- Why
- Petitioners challenged Mishra’s prolonged continuation, the proposed extension of his tenure until 2030, and aspects of BCI governance and trust administration.
Petitioners’ Challenge
BCI Chairman’s Position
Mishra’s tenure
Petitioners’ Challenge
The petitioners argued that BCI rules provide a two-year term and that the April 2025 notification extending the term until 2030 exceeded the rules and could perpetuate existing office-holders.
BCI Chairman’s Position
Counsel for Mishra opposed broad insinuations and indirect allegations, while supporting continuation of routine BCI administration until a newly constituted Council takes over.
Scope of authority
Petitioners’ Challenge
The petitioners said transitional provisions intended to prevent an administrative vacuum had been used to avoid elections and sought Mishra’s removal.
BCI Chairman’s Position
The BCI’s position supported maintaining administrative continuity, while the court clarified that this did not make Mishra a currently democratically elected chairman.
BCI-created trust
Petitioners’ Challenge
The petitioners alleged that the trust made 11 managing trustees permanent and questioned the transfer of BCI assets, income and the transparency of its finances.
BCI Chairman’s Position
The BCI’s counsel objected to broad allegations, while the bench said it would examine whether elected members of an entity could make themselves perpetual trustees of assets belonging to that entity.
- Current status
- Mishra may continue as pro tem BCI chairperson until a freshly constituted BCI elects its office-bearers.
- Role limits
- The existing arrangement may handle day-to-day functioning but does not amount to approval of a permanent or democratically elected chairmanship.
- Policy decisions
- The court said significant BCI policy decisions should involve Attorney General R. Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta.
- Election deadline
- Newly constituted State Bar Councils must elect their chairperson, vice-chairperson, other office-bearers and one BCI representative within three weeks of notification of their composition.
- Tenure challenge
- Petitioners challenged an April 2025 notification extending the chairman and vice-chairman’s terms until 2030.
- Rule cited
- The petitioners said BCI Rule 12(2) provides a two-year term for the chairman and vice-chairman, or until membership ends, whichever is earlier.
- Trust concern
- Petitioners questioned the BCI-PEARL FIRST Trust’s provision making 11 managing trustees original and permanent trustees, along with concerns about its financial transparency.
- Next hearing
- The Supreme Court posted the matter for hearing on September 23.
Sources
BCI Chairperson Manan Mishra only pro tem until lawyers’ body elects new office-bearers, says SC
Tenure temporary: SC tells Bar Council chief to remain in post until fresh elections
Manan Mishra only pro tem BCI Chairperson until Bar body elects new office-bearers: Supreme Court
