Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Abhimanyu Rathore vs The Registrar General
2024 Latest Caselaw 10503 HP

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10503 HP
Judgement Date : 29 July, 2024

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Abhimanyu Rathore vs The Registrar General on 29 July, 2024

Bench: M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Jyotsna Rewal Dua

( 2024:HHC:5977 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Review Petition No. 54 of 2024

.

                                           Reserved on :          July 18 , 2024





                                           Decided on:            July 29 , 2024





    Abhimanyu Rathore                                             ...Petitioner

                                   Versus





    The Registrar General,
    High Court of Himachal Pradesh & others                       ... Respondents


    Coram:


The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioner : Petitioner in person.

For the respondents : Nemo

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Writ petition instituted by the petitioner was dismissed on

16.05.2024 being not maintainable. Petitioner seeks review of the

said decision on the grounds that:-

i) Section 58B of the Advocates Act, 1961 could not be referred during hearing of the case. As per this provision, it is only the State Bar Council that has

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

the jurisdiction to take penal action against an Advocate on its roll. Therefore, it was beyond the

.

domain of the respondent - Bar Association or its

Disciplinary Committee to impose any penalty or to take any action against the petitioner.

ii) Writ petition did not suffer from non-joinder of necessary parties.

2. Both the above grounds are not tenable for maintaining the

review petition. r

3. Following questions were deliberated in the writ petition:-

(i) "whether disciplinary action initiated by an unregistered Bar Association against one of its members could be subject matter for consideration by

this High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India?" and

(ii) "Is there any public element involved for this Court to exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India against the office bearers or members of the HP High Court Bar Association?"

Both the above questions were answered in the negative.

In terms of the decision dated 16.05.2024 (sought to be reviewed), it

was held that there was no public law element involved in the case;

The Himachal Pradesh High Court Bar Association was not a

registered Society; Disciplinary action against a member of the High

Court Bar Association as per norms/bye-laws of the Association is

under the realm of private law. There is no public law element

.

involved in the dispute between a member of the H.P. High Court

Bar Association such as the petitioner and the said Association and

since the said Association is not a registered Society; Merely

because its members are Advocates, who appear in the High Court

and assist in the administration of justice, it cannot be said that the

writ petition against its office bearers in their personal capacity is

maintainable. The writ petition was accordingly dismissed as not

maintainable.

4. By pleading that only the Bar Council of Himachal

Pradesh has power to take action against the Advocates on its

rolls, the petitioner wants this Court to hold in review petition that

action cannot be taken against him by the High Court Bar

Association. Suffice to observe we have already held that the writ

petition against the Himachal Pradesh High Court Bar Association

will not be maintainable. For that reason there is no need for us to

go into this question as well as the other question about non-joinder

of necessary parties.

5. There is no error apparent on the face of record in the

judgment sought to be reviewed. No case for review within the four

corners of law in terms of established parameters is made out. As

such, review petition is dismissed.

.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also to stand

disposed of.






                                          ( M.S. Ramachandra Rao ),
                                                Chief Justice




    July 29 , 2024 (PK)
                      r         to          ( Jyotsna Rewal Dua),
                                                    Judge










 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter