Jammu & Kashmir High Court - Srinagar Bench
J&K State Board Of Education vs Parvaiz Ahmad Koul on 12 November, 2021
S. No. 21
After Notice Matter
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU &KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
RPC No. 4/2009
J&K State Board of Education ...Petitioner(s)
Through: Mr. Z.A Qureshi, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Raziya, Advocate.
V/s
Parvaiz Ahmad Koul ..... Respondent(s)
Through: None
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE.
ORDER
12.11.2021
Through the medium of the instant review petition, review of order
dated 24.09.2008 is being sought to the extent of an observation made about
the conduct of two lawyers appearing for and on behalf of J&K State Board
of School Education. For reference the observation made in the order is
extracted hereunder:-
"No doubt after the service of the notice board engaged
one Agha Humayun who according to the board
officials was given all the material and paid his fees.
Despite this, he did not appear. Another counsel Parvaiz
A. Qazi was engaged and was provided all the material
in the case and paid his fees. He also was casual and
negligent and did not pursue the matter. As a result of
which the ex-parte decree came to be passed against the
petitioners. This conduct of the advocate's ex-facie
tantamount to professional misconduct. At the same
time the board has not shown any eagerness to pursue
the matter as they have remained complacent in respect
of the proceedings".
"I was pained to see the conduct of the advocate's been
engaged by the petitioner. It is observed by the courts
that many cases are lost by the state and such
authorities, because of the negligence of the counsel.
Such a trend has to be arrested and in case any
negligence is attributable to the counsel the same
requires to be enquired by authorities concerned. The
petitioners are at liberty to seek refund of the fees from
the counsel who have been engaged and make an
appropriate application against such counsel for their
alleged misconduct before the appropriate authority".
Mr. Z.A Qureshi, learned appearing counsel for the petitioner would
contend that while deciding the lis i.e., Civil Revision No. 121/2006
whereunder the instant review has arisen, this Court was not required to
make the observations in the light of the law laid down by this Court in case
titled as Mohd. Nazir Fida V.s Habib Ullah Shora & Ors. being LPA No.
154/02.
According to Mr. Z.A Qureshi, the observations/remarks made in the
order under review had been made without issuing a notice to the
lawyers/standing counsel for the State Board of School Education referred to
the in the order under review and without affording them an opportunity of
hearing.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on
record.
Having regard to the law laid down by this Court in LPA No.
154/02(Supra), wherein reference is made to the judgment of the Apex Court
reported in (2001) 3 SCC 54, this Court is of the view that a case for review
is made out warranting expunging of the observations and remarks made
against the lawyers/standing counsel referred to in the review petition being
appearing counsel for the J&K State Board of School Education primarily
and fundamentally on the grounds that before making such
observations/remarks the said lawyers/standing counsel were entitled to a
notice and an opportunity of hearing.
Viewed thus in the light of above, the instant review petition is
accepted and the observations/remarks made in the order under review dated
24.09.2008, made against the lawyers are recalled.
The order shall stand accordingly modified. A copy of this order shall
be placed on the record file of the Civil Revision petition No. 121/2006.
Disposed of.
(JAVED IQBAL)
JUDGE
SRINAGAR
12.11.2021
"Nuzhat"
