Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
C. R. Mahesh Balaje – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for records in D.C.C.No.205/2023 in pursuant to the Notice of Hearing dated 22.12.2023 issued by the 1st Respondent based on the resolution passed in Resolution No.714 of 2023 dated 18.10.2023 on the complaint of the 2nd Respondent in Complaint No.271/2023 and quash the same.
The writ on hand has been instituted challenging the notice of hearing dated 22.12.2023 issued by the 1st respondent based on the resolution passed in Resolution No.714 of 2023 dated 18.10.2023 on the complaint of the 2nd respondent in Complaint No.271/2023 and quash the same.
2. The 2nd respondent filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry against the writ petitioners, who all are practising lawyers. The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry found that there is a prima facie case against the petitioners and consequently referred the complaint for conducting an enquiry before the Disciplinary Committee duly constituted. The Disciplinary Committee issued notice of hearing to the parties for conducting an enquiry. The said notice is under c
A competent authority's notice of hearing in disciplinary proceedings is not subject to challenge in a writ petition unless there are clear grounds of incompetence or mala fides.
The transfer of a disciplinary complaint to the Bar Council of India under Section 36B of The Advocates Act allows the complainant to pursue their case in the appropriate legal forum.
A prima facie opinion by the Bar Council is not subject to judicial review unless it is shown to be issued by an incompetent authority or is tainted with malafides.
The necessity to exhaust statutory appellate remedies before seeking judicial review in disciplinary matters under the Advocates Act, 1961.
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 transfer of a complaint to the Bar Council of India under Section 36B of the Advocates Act establishes the appropriate jurisdiction for disciplinary matters involving advocates.
The transfer of complaints under Section 36B of The Advocates Act to the Bar Council of India is a procedural safeguard that allows for proper adjudication of grievances against advocates.
The court affirmed that the Bar Council's prima facie opinion is not subject to routine judicial review, emphasizing the need for proper inquiry by the Disciplinary Committee.
The court affirmed that the Bar Council's decision to drop a complaint is valid and that aggrieved parties have the right to seek further recourse through established legal channels.
The court considered the futility of continuing disciplinary proceedings against an advocate due to age and inactive practice, leading to the quashing of the notice of hearing.
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
