[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Shamim Rahman vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 8 April, 2026
1
AVANISH
KUMAR
PATHAK
Digitally signed by
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
AVANISH KUMAR
PATHAK
Date: 2026.04.08
18:15:47 +0530
WPC No. 1521 of 2026
Shamim Rahman D/o S.A. Rahman Aged About 50 Years R/o Byran Bazar,
8/289 Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
--- Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Law And Legislation Affair,
Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Chhattisgarh Bar Council Through Secretary, High Court Premises, Bilaspur,
Distt.
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Chhattisgarh Bar Council Through Chairman, Special Committee, High Court
Premises, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.
4 - Bar Association Raipur Through Administrator Raipur, Distt. Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
5 - Chief Electoral Officer Bar Association Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
6 - Appeal Committee Raipur Bar Association, Court Premises, Raipur, Distt.
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
7 - Bar Council Of India Through Its Secretary, 21, Rouse Avenue Institutional
Area, New Delhi 11002.
--- Respondent(s)
For Petitioner : Ms. Hameeda Siddiqui, Adv. with Ms.
Anushka Singh, Ms. Mahima Chandra and
Mr. Harsh Verma, Adv.
For Respondent No. 1/State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. Govt. Adv.
For respondents No. 5 : Mr. Pawan Kesharwani, Adv.
For respondent No. 7 : Mr. Rohan Sharma, Adv. on behalf of Mr.
Shivang Dubey, Adv.
Order Sheet
08/04/2026 Heard.
Issue notice to the respondents on payment of
process fee as per rules. Dasti service is also permitted.
Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 1, 5
and 7 accept notices on behalf of their respective parties,
therefore, issuance of notice to them is dispensed with.
PF be paid for respondents No. 2, 3, 4 and 6 only.
Also heard on I.A. No. 1/2026, application for grant of
interim relief/Stay as well as main petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit
that, the petitioner is a lady practicing lawyer at the District
and Sessions Court, Raipur and has also been enrolled in
the District Bar Association, Raipur (henceforth, referred to
as 'Bar Association'). She further submits that, tenure of the
Bar Association has ended on 10-2-2026, thereafter, on 23-
3-2026, the Chairman of outgoing Bar Association proposed
the name of the senior advocate for appointment to the post
of Chief Election Officer and upon obtaining consent for the
constitution of Appeal Committee, name of senior advocate
so suggested was also unanimously approved. Accordingly,
the members of the Appeal Committee and Assistant
Electoral Officers were also appointed by the Chief Election
Officer, whereas, he has no such power to appoint the
Assistant Electoral Officer solely and on just next day,
regulation of election for the year 2026-28 has been
published i.e. on 24-3-2026 vide Annexure P-1 and no time
for appeal has been given. She further submits that, on the
same day, pursuant to that regulation, notification of
election has been published.
Learned counsel for petitioner also submits
that, as per the notification Annexure P-1, total post of office
bearer of the Bar Association is '18', out of which '5' posts
have been reserved for female Advocates and '9' posts
have been reserved for male Advocates, meaning thereby,
women Advocates have been debarred from participation in
the election of the Bar Association for said '9' posts, which
have been reserved for male Advocates. The posts
reserved for female Advocate are not 30% of total posts,
which is violative of the directions issued by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Yogamaya M.G. Vs. Union
of India and ors [2025 SCC OnLine SC 2701] and in the
case of Ms. Deeksha N Amruthesh Vs. State of
Karnataka and Ors. [Special Leave Petition (C) No.
1404/2025]. She further submitst, that election of the Bar
Association is scheduled to be held on 15-5-2026,
therefore, she prays that election process may be stayed till
decision of instant writ petition.
In reply, learned counsel appearing for
respondent No. 5, who is main contesting party, referring to
the case of Bhartiya Janta Party West Bengal Vs. State
of West Bengal & Ors. [Writ Petition (C) No. 302/2018]
would submit that, since notification for election has been
issued on 24-3-2026 and election process has started and
voting was scheduled to be held on 15-7-2026, which has
been postponed to 17-4-2026, therefore, election process
cannot be stayed. He also relied on the case of Abhijeet
Appasaheb Bacche-Patil and Ors. Vs. Bar Council of
Maharashtra and Goa through its Chairman and Anr.
[2025 SCC OnLine Bom. 1514], and submits that, action
and decision of the Bar Association are not amenable to
the judicial review of the High court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. However, he seeks time to file reply of
interim application as also the main petition.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the material available on record.
Time as prayed by learned counsel for the
respondent No. 5 to file reply is granted.
Perusal of the notification Annexure P-1 dated
24-3-2026 issued by the Chief Election Officer and
Assistant Election Officers of the Bar Association would
show that, there are '18' posts of office bearers, out of
which, '5' posts have been reserved for female Advocates
and '9' posts have been reserved for male Advocates.
When specific question was posed to learned counsel for
the respondent No. 5 as to whether any provision of bye-
laws of the Bar Association provides for reservation of 9
posts for male Advocates, he would submit that, there is no
such provision in the bye-laws. In such situation, if
proposed election is permitted to be held by keeping 9
posts reserved for male Advocates, it would amount to
debar the female Advocates from participation in election
for said 9 posts, which according to the learned counsel for
the respondent No. 5, has not been provided in the bye-
laws of the Bar Association. As contended by learned
counsel for the petitioner, the direction issued by Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Yogamaya (supra) and
Deeksha N. Amruthesh (supra) i.e. for reservation of 30%
representation for female Advocates to the posts of office
bearer of Bar Association has also not been followed.
Therefore, in view of aforesaid facts, purely as an interim
measure, it is directed that, ongoing election process of the
District Bar Association, Raipur is stayed till the next date
of hearing.
List the case on 17-4-2026, as a fresh case.
Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Pathak
