IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 17287 of 2009. [O&M] Date of Decision: 27th September, 2010. Manoj Kumar Sharma Petitioner through Mr. R.S.Sangwan, Advocate Versus Bar Council of India & Anr. Respondents through None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL] The petitioner seeks a Mandamus to the Bar Council of India as well as the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana to enroll him as an Advocate and issue the Enrollment Certificate in accordance with the Advocates Act, 1961. Notice of motion was issued and as per the office report, both the respondents were duly served. No one has put in appearance on their behalf despite opportunities granted on 04.08.2010 as well as today. It appears that the petitioner has been denied registration as an Advocate on the ground that the College from where he passed out his Law Degree is not recognized by the Bar Council of India though the University to which the said Law College is affiliated, is duly recognized by the University Grants Commission as well as the Bar Council of India. That being so, the case of the petitioner is squarely covered in his favour by a decision of this Court in CWP No. 8374 of 2008 [Jai Parkash & Ors. v Bar Council of India & Anr. , decided on 05.11.2009. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner in the light of the judgment of this Court in J ai Parkash's case [supra]. Since the petitioner has already been granted provisional licence, the respondents are directed to consider his case for the grant of regular licence as early as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. Disposed of. Dasti. September 27, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE