Allahabad High Court
Aman Kumar Dhanuk vs Bar Council Of Allahabad Thru. Chairman ... on 3 May, 2024
Author: Sangeeta Chandra
Bench: Sangeeta Chandra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34528-DB
Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3994 of 2024
Petitioner :- Aman Kumar Dhanuk
Respondent :- Bar Council Of Allahabad Thru. Chairman And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- In Person
Counsel for Respondent :- Subhash Chandra Pandey,Murli Manohar Srivastava
Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.
Heard the petitioner in person and Shri J.N. Mathur, Advocate assisted by Mudit Agarwal for opposite party no.2 and Shri Subhash Chandra Pandey appearing for the opposite party no.1.
This writ petition has been filed with the following main prayer :-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to include the name of the petitioner in final voter list of Oudh Bar Association and further be pleased to direct them to permit the petitioner for submission of the nomination form for the post of Joint Secretary in Election of Oudh Bar Association which is going to be held on 14.5.2024."
It is the case of the petitioner that he is a regular practitioner of this Court since 2015 and also member of Oudh Bar Association, High Court, Lucknow since 01.3.2017 as is evident from the Identity card issued by the Bar Council of UP and Identity Card issued by the Oudh Bar Association to him.
The petitioner had also submitted an application along with certificate of proof of practice and his identity card for inclusion of his name in the voter list. The petitioner approached the returning officer from time to time but he was not told any reason for non inclusion of his name in the provisional voter list and his name was shown in defect list. He was only given an assurance that his name will be included in the final voter list. On 24.4.2024 a final voter list has also been published by the returning officer. The petitioner was astonished not to find his name in the final voter list. The petitioner was intending to file nomination for the post of Joint Secretary as per the election schedule published by the returning officer but because his name was not shown in the final voter list he could not file his nomination. The petitioner is a regular practitioner of this Court and he has also submitted a list of five cases which he has filed in the year 2023 and he has also submitted his certificate of practice but the returning officer has arbitrarily not included the name of the petitioner in the final voter list, hence, this petition has been filed.
Shri J.N. Mathur, learned Senior Advocate has pointed out that the certificate of practice which was issued by the Bar Council of the U.P. to the petitioner, a copy of which has been filed at page 18 of the paper book which shows that the petitioner was registered as an Advocate practicing in Lucknow and that he was entitled to cast his vote for election of Bar Council of U.P., at Lucknow but since he had not given any Court in which he usually practices, the place on the certificate regarding name and place of the Bar Association where he is entitled to take part in election has been left blank. After the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court directing that a person can be a voter only in the one of the Courts where he normally practices although he may be a practitioner in several Courts of the same District, name of the petitioner could not be included in the voter list of the Oudh Bar Association.
We have gone through carefully the certificate of practice that has been issued by the Bar Council of U.P. issued under the BCI certificate and place of practice (verification) Rules, 2015. It is evident that there is no Court mentioned or Bar Association mentioned in the column meant for the same in such certificate of practice issued on 01.01.2018.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Bar Council of U.P. that such certificate of practice and its updation requires a nominal fee of Rs.100/- to be deposited if the petitioner deposits Rs.100/- and prays for updation of his certificate of practice to include the Oudh Bar Association.
The petitioner at this stage has stated that when the petitioner has applied for issuance of certificate of practice in year 2018 there was no provision of "One Bar One Vote" and the said rule has only now been introduced and the petitioner has suffered undue hardship as he cannot submit his nomination for the post of Joint Secretary without his name being mentioned in the voter's list.
This Court is of the opinion that the right to vote in election of Oudh Bar Association is governed by the byelaws of the Bar Association. It is not even a statutory right as given under the Representation of Peoples Act. This Court, therefore, cannot issue any mandamus as prayed for by the petitioner in this writ petition without there being any subsisting legal or statutory right in his favour.
With the aforesaid the writ petition stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 3.5.2024
mks
