JUDGMENT 1. Mr. A who was enrolled as a pleader in the Allahabad District Court for the year 1923 has been practising since then in the Courts of the Benares State and now applies to be enrolled as an advocate of this High Court. His ground is that the Benares State Chief Court is almost equivalent to a High Court. 2. The Bar Council has raised an objection on the ground that the Chief Court of the Benares State is not a High Court and Mr. A cannot be treated as having practised in any High Court and is therefore not entitled to be enrolled as an advocate of this High Court. 3. In our opinion the objection raised is sound. Under Bar Council Rule 1 an applicant must either have practised in one or more of the Courts subordinate to this High Court for a period of not less than one year or undergone training in the chambers of a senior member whose name appears on a list approved by this High Court or he must be an advocate of any other "High Court" of not less than two years standing. It is quite clear that Mr. Anandi Prasad has not been practising in any Court subordinate to this High Court nor has he undergone the requisite training. It is equally clear that the Benares State Chief Court cannot be recognized as a Chartered High Court which is referred to in the rules and his practice in such Court cannot be counted. The application is accordingly rejected.