Madras High Court
E.Subbu Muthuramalingam vs The Bar Council Of India on 17 April, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.04.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.P.(MD) No.7978 of 2021
and
WMP(MD).Nos.6094 to 6096 of 2021
E.Subbu Muthuramalingam .. Petitioner
Vs
1. The Bar Council of India,
Rep. by its Secretary,
No.21, Rouse Avenue,
Institutional Area,
Near Bal Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110 002.
2. The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
Puducherry,
Rep. by its Secretary,
No.19, NSC Bose Road,
High Court Campus,
George Town, Chennai - 600 104.
3. Tuticorin Bar Association, (Regd.No.118/2012)
Rep. by its Adhoc Committee Chairman,
Mr.A.W.D.Tilak,
Combined Court Buildings,
__________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
Tuticorin - 628 003. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking
issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, call for the records
pertaining to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in ROC No.738 of 2021
dated 10.04.2021 and quash the same and consequently, direct the
respondents 1 and 2 to publish the list of Non-practicing advocates as
mandated under Rule 4(j) and Rule 13 and Rule 20 of The Certificate and
Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 before conducting elections to
the Tuticorin Bar Association.
For Petitioner : Mr.L.Shaji Chellan
For respondents : Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar,
Standing Counsel for R2
M/s.Mahalakshmi,
for Bar Council of India/R1
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
We have elaborately heard Mr.Shaji Chellan, learned Counsel
appearing for the writ petitioner and Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar, learned
Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent and
Mrs.Mahalakshmi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first
respondent.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
2. This writ petition filed by an Advocate seeks for two reliefs, one is
to quash the notice issued by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
Puducherry, dated 10.04.2021, calling for election to Tuticorin Bar
Association. The second limb of the prayer sought for in the writ petition is
to publish the list of Non-practising Advocates in Tuticorin Bar
Association. In our considered view, both the prayers cannot be clubbed
together as both the reliefs sought for are independent of each other and
therefore, such a writ petition with two prayers which are distinct from each
other, cannot be entertained.
3. Secondly, with regard to the prayer sought for to quash the
notification issued by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, dated
10.04.2021, the same cannot be entertained, because, the said notification is
pursuant to a direction issued by the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in
W.P(MD).No.4547 of 2021, dated 04.03.2021.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
4. It is the submission of Mr.Shaji Chellan, learned Counsel
appearing for the petitioner that the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in the
said order, dated 04.03.2021, only permitted the Bar Council to conduct the
election in accordance with law, upon issuing appropriate notices in such
regard and the word 'permitted' has been misinterpretated by the Bar
Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry.
5. In our view, we cannot entertain such an argument which amounts
to interpretation of an order passed by the Hon'ble First Bench which
remains intact as on date. It is submitted by the learned Counsel that the
review application has been filed to review the said order and judgment. If
that is so, it is for the reveiw petitioner to work out his remedies in the
manner known to law.
6. Reference was made to the order passed in CRP(MD).No.860 of
2017, dated 19.04.2017, to support the submission that in the said civil
revision petition, there is a stay for conducting the election to the Tuticorin
Bar Association. The said revision petition arose out of a civil litigation
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
between two Advocates, who are plaintiffs and Tuticorin Bar Association
represented by its then Secretary. Much water has flown under the bridge
and an Adhoc Committee has been appointed and there were several
litigations and several cases were filed before this Court and in our
considered veiw, less said the better. Therefore, we cannot entertain this
writ petition for the reliefs sought for.
7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. However, if the
petitioner has chosen to avail other remedies, any observation made in this
order will not prejudice the petitioner in those proceedings. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed.
(T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
17.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
pkn
Note : In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that the
copy of the order that is presented is the
correct copy, shall be the responsibility of
the advocate/litigant concerned.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
To:
1. Secretary,
The Bar Council of India,
No.21, Rouse Avenue,
Institutional Area,
Near Bal Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110 002.
2. Secretary,
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and
Puducherry,
No.19, NSC Bose Road,
High Court Campus,
George Town, Chennai - 600 104.
3. Adhoc Committee Chairman,
Tuticorin Bar Association, (Regd.No.118/2012)
Mr.A.W.D.Tilak,
Combined Court Buildings,
Tuticorin - 628 003.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.7978 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.P.(MD) No.7978 of 2021
17.04.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
