PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court on Friday ruled that the condition of clearing the National Testing Service examination for registration of LLB graduates with the provincial bar council could not be applied with retrospective effect to the students of the 2010 session.

A bench comprising Chief Justice Mazhar Alam Mianlchel and Justice Malik Manzoor Hussain pronounced a short order partially accepting two petitions of 115 students.

It declared that the notincation issued by the Pakistan Bar Council on Mar 7, 2013, through which the NTS examination was declared mandatory for registration, was not applicable retrospectively to the petitioners as well as entire batch of students of same session.

The bench also ruled that the curriculum provided by NTS was not in line with Rule 108 (C ) of Pakistan Bar Council Rules 1976.

It added that through interim order on Aug 5, 2014, the petitioners were allowed by the court to join apprenticeship and the respondents including Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council were directed to provisionally entertain their intimation forms, so the respondents should proceed with the previous procedure for their enrolment as advocates.

The petitioners had challenged anotification issued by the PBC under Section 55 of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Act.

Through the impugned notification, the PBC had declared the clearing of the NTS examination mandatory for the graduates for their registration with the provincial bar council.

The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Bar Council had adopted the said notification and ordered holding of the NTS examination, which was scheduled to start from Sep 27 (Saturday).

Lawyers Mohammad Ali and Mian Mohibullah Kakakhel, counsel for the petitioners, said the impugned notification was illegal and contrary to law.

They insisted the notification was not in the powers of the PBC as mentioned in Section 55 of the Bar Council Act.

Mohammad Ali contended that the syllabus was already provided in Rule 108 (C) of the Bar Council Rules for the examinations which were earlier conducted before the introduction of NTS.

However, he added the PBC added Rule 108 (L) in the said Rules through which some additional subjects were added for NTS examination which was contrary to law.

The lawyer said for sake of arguments even if it was assumed that the notification was legal then it could not be applied with retrospective effect to the petitioners whose session was 2010 to 2013.

He explained that under the previous procedure after appearance infinal examination a student was given provisional certificate before declaration of result and he could start apprenticeship by giving Ist intimation form to bar council.

The lawyer added that after mandatory six months apprenticeship he had to give second intimation form following which the bar council conducted examination after declaration of results. He added that now in the new system after declaration of results a student has to appear in NTS examination and to receive 50 percent following which he was entitle to submit Ist intimation form.

Abdul Lateef Afridi, lawyer for PBC, argued that the notification was not aimed at creating hurdles in way of young lawyers and in fact it was aimed at reforming the legal profession. He added that presently because of some black sheep had brought a bad name to this noble profession.

The lawyer said NTS was not a bad option and it was only a sort of screening of graduates so that reformed and competent persons should enter this profession.

He added that if there were certain flaws in the NTS examination the same could be removed.

The counsel of KP Bar Council Amjid Ali Shah said the new mechanism was adopted in accordance with the recommendations of the National Judicial Policy making Committee so that the graduates should be filtered before joining the profession.