The judgment emphasizes the significance of compliance with Bar Council rules regarding practice suspension and electoral roll preparation, and the limited grounds for challenging an election based on electoral roll irregularities.

Petitioner, an Advocate prac­ticing in the High Court, challenges the election of the third respondent as member of the Kerala Bar Council. Contention raised by the petitioner is that third respondent is a Full-Time salaried employee of the Kerala Law Academy, Law College, Thiruvan­anthapuram and so, he is not entitled to contest the election as a practicing Advocate.

2. The averments made by the petitioner are to the following effect.- Bar Council of Kerala framed rules for the conduct of elections, known as

"The Bar Council of Kerala Elections Rules, 1970". These Rules do not provide anything regarding the disqualification for being chosen as a member of the State Bar Council. Rule 7 provides that no person shall be entitled to seek election unless his name is in the Electoral Roll. Nomination paper insists on a declaration by the candidate that, -­

"I have not incurred any of the disqualifi­cations for being a member of the Council as stated in the election rules."

Council issued notification for the election of 25 members. Elections were held on different dates in December, 1991. Third respondent is the Managing Trustee as well as the Manager of the Kerala Law Academy, Law College, Thiruvananthapuram. He was also function­ing as Full-time Principal of that College from its very inception from the year 1966. He was drawing salary from that institution for working in the various posts referred to above. He had never informed the Bar Council of Kerala of the suspension of his practice for taking up salaried job of Principal and as Manager and Managing Trustee of the Kerala Law Academy, Law College. For the purpose of contesting the election to the Bar Council, he resigned from the post of Princi­pal. But, he is still continuing in the post of Managing Trustee and Manager of the institution. He submitted his nomination for election as a member of the Kerala Bar Council. No objection was raised by any of the contesting candidates regarding the in­validity of the nomination. He deliberately suppressed the truth and gave a false declara­tion that he is an Advocate and he has standing of so many years, a declaration which is false and false to his knowledge. Though under R.7 third respondent may perhaps be entitled to seek election by virtue of the inclusion of his name in. the electoral roll, his nomination should not have been accepted as he had given a patently false declaration. Third respondent is even now holding the post of a member of the Syndicate of the University of Kerala, which he acquired only by virtue of his status as Managing Trustee and Manager of the Kerala Law Academy, Law College, Thiruvanantha­puram. He is also holding the post of Director of the Center for Advanced Legal Studies and he is receiving various types of grants from the University Grants Commission, running to lakhs of rupees. After the election, the Bar Council of Kerala issued a notification con­taining the names of elected candidates. Third respondent is shown as No. 2 therein. Prior to the publication, the list of successful candi­dates was forwarded to the Advocate General for his certificate. Before such certification was made, petitioner submitted an applica­tion praying for invalidating the election of the third respondent. Advocate General dis­missed that petition, as per Exhibit P4 order. Third respondent's name has been included in the list of successful candidates, disregarding the provisions of law and by ignoring the total disability suffered by him even to contest the election.

3. On behalf of the second respondent, Kerala Bar Council, a counter-affidavit has been sworn to by its secretary. According to this counter-affidavit, third respondent volun­tarily suspended his practice with effect from 13-6-1971, on his assuming the office of Principal of the Kerala Law Academy, Law College. On relinquishment of the post of Principal, he applied to the Council for resumption of practice. The Committee con­sidered the request and allow