The main legal point established in the judgment is that a private body, such as a Bar Association, can be subject to a writ of certiorari or mandamus if it has statutory duties and violates them, leading to civil consequences for individuals.

Headnote:
Expulsion - Bar Association - S.28 of the Travancore Companies Act - Art.4(1) - Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund Act - S.15 - S.23 - Rules - Statutory duty of Bar Association - Writ of certiorari and mandamus - Quashing of resolution
Fact of the Case:

The Alappuzha Bar Association passed a resolution to remove 12 members, labeling them as retired hands. The expelled members, who were eligible for membership, sought a writ to strike down the resolution, contending violation of constitutional guarantees and principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the Bar Association had statutory duties under the Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund Act and Rules, including the sale of welfare stamps and admission of advocates to the fund. The expulsion violated the statutory duty, affecting the members' right to practice law.
Issues: The main issues were the legality of the resolution, the Bar Association's statutory duties, and the availability of writs of certiorari and mandamus against the Association.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Bar Association had statutory duties to its members under the Act and Rules, and the expulsion violated these duties, impacting the members' right to practice law. It further determined that a writ of certiorari in the nature of quashing the resolution was appropriate to remedy the injustice caused by the expulsion.
Final Decision: The original petition was allowed, and the resolution was quashed. The court expressed disapproval of the manner in which the members were expelled and emphasized the equal treatment and privileges entitled to all members of the Bar.

Judgment :-

Alappuzha Bar Association by a resolution adopted in an extraordinary general body meeting held on 10-1-1992 resolved to remove 12 members from the Bar Association. The resolution Ext.Rl(b) describes them as retired hands. That resolution is under challenge in this original petition filed by the expelled members who seek a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or direction to strike down that, resolution.

2. Before joining the Bar at Alapuzha, petitioners had been in service either under the Government of Kerala, the Government of India or public undertakings. They were duly enrolled as members of the first respondent Bar Association. The Alappuzha Bar Association was incorporated under S.28 of the Travancore Companies Act. Art.4(1) of the memorandum of association stipulates that membership is open to all advocates and. pleaders entitled to practise in all or in any of the civil courts of Travancore and permanently residing within the jurisdiction of Munsiffs Court, Alappuzha. Petitioners are eligible to become members of the association.

3. Petitioners are also members of Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund'. Such membership can be obtained only through a Bar Association. Petitioners have become members of the fund through first respondent Association. They continue to be on the roll of advocates under the Bar Councils Act. They were expelled from the membership in violation of the relevant constitutional guarantees and principles of natural justice solely on the ground that they are retired personnel. First respondent has not informed them of the expulsion whereas they knew about removal of membership from newspaper reports. The resolution of expulsion from membership passed against petitioners is null and void. The extraordinary general body meeting at which the resolution was adopted has no legal sanctity. It also violates the constitutional guarantee available to petitioners to practice a profession of their choice. Petitioners seek a direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari to quash that resolution.

4. On behalf of first respondent a counter affidavit was filed by the President raising the following contentions. The Association is neither a statutory authority nor other authority within the meaning of Art.12 of the Constitution of India. The Association does not discharge any public duty vis-a-vis the members of the Association or the general publia It is a purely private body incorporated under the Travancore Companies Act and an existing company within the meaning of S3 of the Companies Act 1956. resolutions passed by the general body of the Executive Committee of the Association are not orders or proceedings of either a quasi judicial authority or an administrative authority. Such resolutions are not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Art.226 of the Constitution.

5. Neither the membership in the Kerala Advocates Welfare Fund nor the right of petitioners to practice law as an advocate on the roll of the Bar Council is in any way affected by the action taken against them. The expulsion from the membership of the Association does not violate any of the constitutional guarantees available to petitioners nor does it amount to violation of principles of natural justice.

6. The Executive Committee of the Bar Association had met on 13-12-1991. One of the members of the Executive Committee has raised an issue regarding certain complaints received from some members of the Bar. The said complaints related to certain unprofessional conduct on the part of those lawyers who have been practising after retirement from Government service or other services. The decision to expel petitioners was taken by the general body after being convinced of the fact that continuing of the membership of the petitioners as members of the Association would not be in conformity with the spirit and tradition of the Bar Association which has been in existence for more than 50 years. None of the rounds raised in the orig

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

Judicial Analysis