New Delhi, July 8 -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that neither banks nor the Indian Banks' Association (IBA) can bypass the disciplinary framework under the Advocates Act by declaring an advocate professionally negligent or incompetent through circulation of caution lists, holding such action is "illegal, unsustainable and impermissible". In a parallel push to strengthen accountability within the legal profession, a bench of justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to undertake a comprehensive performance audit of the disciplinary mechanisms of the BCI and state bar councils, and asked it to consider establishing a National Legal Academy on the lines of the National Judicial Academy to institutionalise continuing legal education and professional training for lawyers. Authored by Justice Narasimha, the court held that while banks are free to discontinue the services of a panel advocate if dissatisfied with the quality of legal advice, they cannot publicly brand a lawyer as professionally incompetent or circulate adverse remarks among other banks. If a bank believes an advocate has committed professional negligence or misconduct, the court held, its remedy lies in approaching the concerned state bar council, which alone has exclusive disciplinary jurisdiction under the Advocates Act. "The appropriate remedy is to place the relevant material before the competent State Bar Council... Permitting banks or banking associations to bypass the disciplinary process under the Advocates Act and unilaterally portray an advocate as professionally incompetent by including his name in a Caution List is illegal, unsustainable and impermissible," said the bench. The court added that such parallel mechanisms undermine the Bar's constitutionally protected independence and its self-regulatory character, which forms an integral part of judicial independence. The judgment arose from an appeal filed by an advocate whose name was included in an IBA caution list circulated among banks after Syndicate Bank (now Canara Bank) alleged that he failed to disclose that part of a mortgaged property had already been sold while furnishing a title verification report. The lawyer contended that the listing destroyed his professional reputation....