SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Mad) 216

MARKANDEY KATJU, D.MURUGESAN
N. Kailasam – Appellant
Versus
The Bar Council of India represented by its Chairman, New Delhi and others. – Respondent


Advocates:
N. Venkateswaran, for Appellant,
K.S. Kumar, for Respondent No.3.

Markandey Katju, C.J.:This writ appeal is filed against the impugned order dated 22.11.2004 passed by the learned single Judge, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The writ petition was filed against the show case notice dated 5.2.2004 issued to the appellant. It is well-settled that ordinarily no writ will lie against as show cause notice videExecutive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board v.Ramesh Kumar Singh, J.T. (1995)8 S.C.331 and Special Director v. Mohammed Ghulam Ghouse, A.I.R. 2004 S.C.1467. A writ petition against a show cause notice is premature because no cause of action has arisen by a mere issuance of a show cause. The appellant can file his reply to the show cause notice, and if and when any adverse order is passed against him, it is at that stage that he can approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief. The writ appeal is, therefore, dismissed ‘as prermature’ connected W.A.M.P. No.152 of 2005 is closed.
Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top