BCI's Manan Mishra Tries Changing PEARL Trust Rules, Members Object, Seek Disclosures

New Delhi: Three members of the Bar Council of India (BCI) have opposed its chairman Manan Kumar Mishra's bid to change the working rules of the trust set up under his watch in 2020. The rules Mishra sought to change are under the Supreme Court of India's scanner and pertain to permanent positions on the PEARL-FIRST Trust.

Until 2020, said the members who have raised objections, the trustees had to be members of the BCI. The reconstituted trust allows for managing trustees to remain in their position after their BCI membership expires. Mishra has now sought to end the practice of appointing managing trustees beyond their BCI terms.

The Supreme Court had earlier in September asked how the BCI could make rules for its trust that extend after the tenure of its members. It had placed several other restrictions on the functioning of both Mishra and the BCI and its trust pending a resolution of the issues.

The BCI had then committed to the court that would involve the Attorney General of India and the Solicitor General of India, both ex-officio BCI members, before taking any major policy decision. "Both the Attorney General for India and the Solicitor General for India shall be actively associated with every policy decision taken by the Bar Council of India," the court had observed.

The decision to change the trustees' tenure was announced on the official BCI WhatsApp group by Mishra. In the message, reports Live Law, he had said, "You all are aware of the reason why this provision for Permanent Managing Trustees was introduced in the Trust Deed."

The three BCI members responded in a letter dated September 19, "We are not aware of the reason."

They have demanded the trust deed, which they say they have earlier asked for but were not supplied. They also want to know if the deed under which the PEARL-FIRST Trust was registered contains the exact provision allowing managing trustees to retain their positions on the trust after no longer being BCI members.

The letter is addressed to Mishra and signed by members Senior Advocate Y.R. Sadasiva Reddy, Advocate Srinath Tripathi and Advocate N. Manoj Kumar.

"The members have sought production of the notice convening the 2020 General Council meeting, the agenda and explanatory note relating to Item No. 474/2020, the complete draft Trust Deed circulated before the meeting, proof of circulation to members, attendance and voting records, any dissent or reservation, the resolution authorising execution and the final version registered with the authorities," reports Live Law.

PEARL-FIRST is an acronym for Trust for Promotion of Education (Legal and Professional) and Reforms in Law and Improvement of Research and Social Training. The earlier trust was named BCI Trust.

Since the PEARL-FIRST Trust was set up with the aim to promote legal education and awareness, the three BCI members have sought a thorough accounting of its expenditures and the purposes for which the amounts have been accessed over the years.

It has sought examination of allegations of nepotism at Indian Institute of Legal Education and Research (IIULER), including appointment-related records starting from advertising for the positions at the institute and final selection.

The letter says all financial and administrative records and receipts related to the PEARL-FIRST Trust be preserved pending satisfaction of BCI members and the court. A part of this process  of tallying of records would be done by the BCI itself, once the documents are made available.

Mishra has been in the eye of a storm since August 13, when he sought to cancel the enrolment of all students in the 2026 batch at NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad, because a section of students had objected to the Chief Justice of India attending their convocation as the chief guest. The students had raised objections as CJI Surya Kant had referred to the unemployed and some others as "cockroaches".

As Mishra's effort to cancel their enrolment had snowballed into student protests at other law universities, he had first withdrawn his order and subsequently apologised.

There have been calls for Mishra to step down since the controversy, and the Supreme Court has put a lid on his extensions in the top post at BCI since 2014, saying there cannot be more than two extensions to the two-year tenure.

Two public interest petitions against his actions and continuation in the post of chairman have been filed; one by the Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) and separately by two lawyers. Both CJAR and the lawyers' petitions say a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is pending against Mishra regarding the PEARL-FIRST trust.

“This trust took over the funds of an earlier trust set up by the BCI (BCI Trust). This taking over of the funds as well as their utilisation is being enquired into by the CBI,” CJAR has said. The demand for Mishra’s resignation was also formally raised during a General Council meeting held at the BCI office in August.

The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.