Lawyer Gurdial Singh Nijar, representing Harminder, informed Justice Alice Loke that the attorney-general (AG) had no objection to the application being decided on its merits. The AG also wrote to the court to confirm his position.

Lawyer Abraham Au, who appeared with Gurdial, told FMT a notice of hearing would be sent to the Bar’s solicitors in due course.

Also appearing for Harminder was counsel Ivy Shu.

Harminder, who retired from the bench last year, is seeking to practise as a consultant with law firm Rosli Dahlan Sarvana Partnership.

Rule 60 of the Legal Profession (Practice and Etiquette) Rules 1978 allows a person with at least 20 years’ service as a superior court judge or practising lawyer to be appointed by a legal firm as consultant.

Rule 62 states that the Bar Council may, in writing, with the AG’s approval, waive any rule in the 1978 Rules, which Harminder contends includes the 20-year requirement set by Rule 60.

The Bar rejected Harminder’s application in a letter dated Jan 20 this year.

Harmindar is seeking a declaration that the Bar’s rejection of his application was illegal, irrational, procedurally unfair, and in breach of his legitimate expectation.

He wants the court to quash the Bar’s rejection and affirm his entitlement to practise as a legal consultant.

Harmindar served on the bench for 16 years, having been appointed a High Court judge in 2009 before his elevation to the Court of Appeal and, later, the Federal Court.

Prior to his elevation, he served in the judicial and legal services, which he joined in 1982.

He made his application for admission as a consultant in July last year.