2018 Supreme(Del) 1846
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SANJIV KHANNA, CHANDER SHEKHAR, JJ.
Pratap Mehta - Appellant
Versus
Sunil Gupta & Ors. - Respondents
LPA 365 of 2018, CAV No. 620 of 2018 & CM Nos. 27472-73 of 2018; LPA 366, 372 & 371 of 2018 & CM Nos. 27475-76, 27693-94 & 27691-92 of 2018
Decided On : 17-07-2018
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. J.P. Sengh, Mr. Sunil Dalal, Ms. Garima Goel, Mr. Rajiv Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Bhardwaj S. Iyengar, Mr. Nitin Gaur
Headnote:
Election Dispute - State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh - Letters Patent Act - Chapter-X - Summary of Acts and Sections: Letters Patent Act, Rule 122-A of the M.P. State Bar Council Rules, BCI Rules - The court discussed the election dispute regarding the representative of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh to the Bar Council of India. The court examined the minutes of the General Body Meeting, letters addressing the Chairman, and the special meetings held on 2nd August, 2014. The court analyzed the compliance with the BCI Rules and the legality of the election process. The court found that the election held on 2nd August, 2014 was invalid due to non-compliance with the BCI Rules and directed the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh to hold fresh elections for the representative to the Bar Council of India.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an election dispute regarding the representative of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh to the Bar Council of India. The dispute arose from the minutes of the General Body Meeting, letters addressing the Chairman, and the special meetings held on 2nd August, 2014.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the election held on 2nd August, 2014 was invalid due to non-compliance with the BCI Rules. The court directed the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh to hold fresh elections for the representative to the Bar Council of India.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the legality of the election process, compliance with the BCI Rules, and the validity of the election held on 2nd August, 2014.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the non-compliance with the BCI Rules, specifically Rules 2, 7, and 8, which rendered the election held on 2nd August, 2014 invalid. The court emphasized the importance of following the election process to ensure free, fair, and transparent elections.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeals and upheld the finding that the election held on 2nd August, 2014 was invalid. The court directed the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh to hold fresh elections for the representative to the Bar Council of India.
Sanjiv Khanna, J.
1. Aforestated Letters Patent Appeals under Chapter-X of the Letters Patent Act impugn common judgment dated 6th July, 2018 by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.2142/2016, State Bar Council of M.P. v. Bar Council of India & Ors. and W.P.(C) No.2215/2016, Sunil Gupta v. Bar Council of India & Ors.
2. Present lis is an unfortunate litigation regarding election of the representative of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh (“SBCMP”) to the Bar Council of India (“BCI”). SBCMP and BCI are pitted and opposing each other on the question who should represent SBCMP before the BCI.
3. It is undisputed that Mr. Rameshwar Nikhra was elected as the Chairman in the General Body Meeting ('GBM') of SBCMP held on 29th June, 2014 at Jabalpur. As per recorded minutes of the GBM of SBCMP held on 29th June, 2014, the meeting had recommenced after an adjournment/suspension consequent to the election of the Chairman, and thereupon, Vice-Chairman, Treasurer and members of various committees including SBCMP representative to BCI were elected. Minutes state that Mr. Sunil Gupta, petitioner in W.P.(C) No.2215/2016 before the Single Judge, was elected to represent SBCMP at the BCI.
4. On 29th June, 2014 itself, nine members of SBCMP had written a letter addressed to the Chairman of SBCMP, stating that post election to the post of Chairman, the GBM was adjourned. There was no information about recommencement of GBM till 2 pm and no meeting took place in the meeting hall thereafter. The Chairman was requested to conduct remaining elections by holding "adjourned meeting" of GBM.
5. Subsequently, two letters both dated 13th July, 2014 were written to the officiating secretary of the SBCMP. First letter signed by thirteen members was under Rule 122-A of the M.P. State Bar Council Rules to call for a special meeting within 21 days to consider no-confidence motion against the Chairman as after election of the Chairman on 29th June, 2014, GBM of the SBCMP was adjourned and had not been called in spite of the letter by 9 members dated 29th June, 2014. Second letter had asserted that upon election of the Chairman, election for other posts including BCI representative was adjourned. Nine members had written letter dated 29th June, 2014 at 2.20 P.M. that elections for the remaining posts be conducted. It was regrettable that meeting was not called for holding elections. Officiating secretary was requested to call for a meeting within 21 days on receipt of the letter for conducting election for the remaining posts.
6. In view the letters dated 29th June, 2014 and 14th July, 2014 (letters dated 13th July, 2014 were received by SBCMP on 14th July, 2014), emails from two members and another letter by one member disputing election process of Vice Chairman, Treasurer and various committees in representative to the BCI, Officiating secretary vide notice dated 16th July, 2014 had convened and informed members that a special GBM of the SBCMP was scheduled on 2nd August, 2014. As this notice is of some relevance, we reproduce the same in entirety including the portion with the signature of the officiating Secretary enclosing the letters dated 29th June, 2014, 14th July, 2014, 15th July, 2014 and 16th July, 2014. Notice dated 16th July, 2014 reads;-
Sir/Ma’am,
The Special Meeting of the General Body of the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh will be organized on 02nd August, 2014 Day-Saturday, in conference hall of council office at 11:00 am in which the signed letter by 9 Hon'ble Member of the council dated 29.01.2014 and two letters dated 14.07.2014 signed by Hon'ble Members received on 14.07.2014 and two e-mails signed by two Hon'ble Members by them two letters were received dated 15.07.2014 and two letters signed by one Hon'ble Member was received on 16.07.2014 in which by one letter request was made to call the meeting for election on the post of Vice President, Treasurer of the council, for representative to Bar council of India and with it fo