Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
V. Senthil – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry, Madras High Court Buildings – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
[PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned resolution based on which the Notification issued by the Bar Association, Tambaram, the 2nd respondent herein dated 11.07.2024 and quash the same.]
The impugned order issued by the Bar Association, Tambaram against the writ petitioner is offending his basic right to practice law in Court premises.
2. Mr. G. Karthikeyan, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has been suspended from the Bar Association merely because he attended the Court contrary to the decision taken by the Bar Association, Tambaram.
3. Boycott of Lawyers are dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in many Judgments and the Apex Court in an unequivocal terms held that one day boycott would be the last resort of any Bar Association and there cannot be any continuous boycott by Lawyers, which would affect the rights of the litigants and also the Justice Delivery System.
4. Mr. P. Santhaseelan, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent would strenuousl
The right to practice law is a fundamental right protected by the Constitution, and Bar Associations cannot impose restrictions that infringe upon this right.
Judicial review by the High Court does not extend to adjudicating the merits of disciplinary complaints against lawyers, which must be handled by the Bar Council.
The Bar Council is mandated to investigate complaints against advocates and enforce prohibitory orders to maintain the integrity of the legal profession.
Bar Associations are integral part of Justice Delivery System and performing the functions of public nature, Bar Association itself is a public functionary. Therefore, the High Court Administration i....
The right to legal representation and the right to defend oneself are fundamental rights protected under the Constitution of India, and any resolution infringing upon these rights is unconstitutional....
Section 38 of the Advocates' Act, 1961 establishes a mandatory appellate process to the Supreme Court for aggrieved parties in Bar Council proceedings, which must be adhered to instead of seeking wri....
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry does not have jurisdiction over landlord-tenant disputes as they do not involve professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961.
Lawyers' strikes violate litigants' right to justice; conditions for bail must not impede the right to personal liberty.
The Bar Council lacks the authority to impose interim suspension on an Advocate pending disciplinary proceedings, as per the Advocates Act, 1961, which mandates adherence to due process and principle....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
