The Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken up a petition challenging the recent mandate requiring a law degree for the position of general counselor within the High Court Legal Services Committee (HCLSC). This legal move, under the case name Apurva Banchata and Others v. High Court Legal Services Committee, questions the necessity of a Bachelor of Laws (LL.B.) degree for a role previously filled by candidates with just a Master’s degree in Psychology.
Historically, the role demanded only a Master’s in Psychology, but an August 4 notification altered these qualifications, now demanding both a legal and psychological academic background. Reacting to the petition, Justice Sudeepti Sharma has requested a formal response from the HCLSC. The petitioners, three general counselors, claim the new criteria could disrupt their ongoing contracts, as they have been serving since 2024 with only psychology degrees.
The court has set the hearing for September 1, stressing the need for any responses to be submitted beforehand, with copies provided to the petitioners’ legal representatives. The bench, led by Justice Sharma, highlighted the importance of addressing these changes that affect counselors contracted to mediate in matrimonial, women’s, children’s, and senior citizens’ disputes.
The petitioners argue that the dual degree requirement is impractical, as few individuals possess both law and psychology qualifications. They further contend that the addition of a law degree lacks justification for the counselor role. The legal team for the petitioners includes Advocates Gagandeep Kumar Tiwari and Devi Lal, while Advocate Arjun Shukla represents the HCLSC.
This legal debate not only raises questions about the qualifications necessary for effective mediation but also highlights the evolving expectations within legal service committees. As the court examines the rationale behind this dual-degree requirement, stakeholders await a decision that could redefine the criteria for future appointments in the HCLSC.
