[BCI Rules] HC Expounds: Not mandatory to wear a gown before any court other than the Apex Court or the High Courts [Read Judgment]

A division bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R. Mahadevan and Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, in a PIL to issue a writ of declaration, quashed the order of the tribunal regarding instructions on the dress code of advocates appearing before them as it was not in their power to do so and was in contravention with the rules of the Bar Council of India.

Brief Facts:

The petitioner was an advocate and had filled this Public Interest Litigation to issue a writ of declaration to declare the order of the second respondent dated 14.11.2017 – NCLT as ultra vires, null and void, and therefore to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, and devoid of merits to the extent that it relates to the imposition of dress code for advocates appearing before the tribunal.

Observations of the Court:

It was noted by the court that according to Section 34 of the Advocates Act and the Bar Council Rules, only the high court can frame rules for the dress code for the appearance of advocates, and as per the Bar Council of India rules it is optional and not mandatory to wear a gown before any courts other than the Supreme Court or the High Courts. Further, the powers as per the Rule 51 of the NCLT Rules are merely for discharging functions in accordance with the acts as per the principles of natural justice and equity. This cannot be inferred as a power to prescribe the dress code especially when it contravenes the Bar Council of India rules. It was also noted by the court that the NCLT had modified its earlier order in accordance with the Bar Council of India Rules with regard to the dress code for legal practitioners, However, the said order, even though withdrawn was quashed.

Decision of the Court:

The writ petition was allowed as prayed for and the order of the tribunals with regard to the instructions on the dress code of advocates was quashed.

Case Title: R. Rajesh v. Union of India

Coram: The Honourable Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan and The Honourable Mr. Justice Mohammed Shaffiq

Case No.: W.P.No. 31852 of 2017 and WMP.Nos. 35007 and 35008 of 2017

Advocate for the Appellant:  Mr. Rajesh (Petitioner – in–person)

Advocate for the Respondent: Dr. V. Venkatesan for R1; Mr. S.R. Raghunathan for R3

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com