The withdrawal of a previous writ petition without reserving any liberty does not bar a fresh writ petition if there is a change in circumstances and a fresh cause of action. The validity of a law degree and the impact of a pending criminal complaint on enrolment eligibility were also key legal principles discussed.

1. The petitioner, whose application for enrolment as an advocate was not entertained by the Bar Council, has come up with the above writ petition seeking the issue of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the Bar Council to enroll him.

2. Heard Mr. M. Nedunchezian, petitioner appearing in person and Mr. S.Y. Masood, learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The petitioner was a freelance reporter in a monthly magazine known as Thuppariyum Visaranai. The petitioner became a subscriber to two chit groups in the Pattukottai Branch of a non banking finance company by name Sriram Chits Tamil Nadu (Private) Limited, having head office at Chennai. He bagged the chit amount in the first auction. On the ground that he committed default in payment of the instalments, the company initiated arbitration proceedings in A.R.C. No. 34 of 2005 before the Deputy Registrar of Chits. An award was passed, as against which, a statutory appeal was filed by the petitioner under the Tamil Nadu Chit Funds Act, 1961. It was dismissed by the Government and the petitioner appears to have filed a revision on the file of the Madurai Bench of this Court under Article 227 of The Constitution.

4. Apart from working out his statutory remedies against the action initiated by the Non-Banking Finance Company, the petitioner also wrote an article in November 2007 in the magazine for which he was a freelance reporter, criticising the action of the non banking financial company. The article was perceived by the non banking finance corporation as a malicious propaganda causing extensive damage to their reputation. Therefore, the said company filed a private complaint in C.C. No. 59 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Thanjavur against the writ petitioner herein as well as the editor and the publisher of the aforesaid monthly magazine. The private complaint was taken on file and processes were issued to the petitioner and other accused, for the alleged offences under Sections 499, 500 and 501 of the Indian Penal Code. The criminal complaint is pending trial.

5. Perhaps, after tasting litigation first hand, the petitioner got interested in law and joined a law college in Bangalore and completed a three year degree in law from a college affiliated to Bangalore University. On the basis of the said degree, the petitioner applied to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu seeking enrolment. In the application for enrolment, submitted in June 2013, the petitioner disclosed the pendency of the criminal complaint. Therefore, in view of the order passed by a learned Judge of this Court in Criminal O.P. (MD) No. 14573 of 2014, the Bar Council did not pass his application for enrolment.

6. Hence, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 26216 of 2013 on the file of this Court. After the writ petition was heard and orders were reserved on 21.2.2014, the petitioner sought to withdraw the said writ petition without reserving any liberty. Therefore, the said writ petition was dismissed by an order dated 17.7.2014 by the learned Judge without any liberty.

7. But, it appears that after the dismissal of the writ petition filed by the petitioner herein on 17.7.2014, two orders came to be passed in M.P. (MD) No. 2 of 2014 in Criminal O.P. (MD) No. 14573 of 2014 on 1.8.2014 and 11.8.2014, permitting the enrolment of 658 candidates. In the order passed on 11.8.2014, the learned Judge observed that candidates, who have not declared their criminal background, should not be enrolled and that the right of enrolment of those candidates would be decided at the time of final disposal. Therefore, contending that there is change of circumstances, entitling him to come up with a fresh writ petition, the petitioner has come up with this writ petition.

8. The contention of the writ petitioner is two fold namely:-

(a) That a person facing a private complaint for an alleged offence under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be taken to be of a criminal background, so as to make him inel