Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
J. Jayapaul Mohan – Appellant
Versus
Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to initiate criminal proceedings against the 2nd respondent Enrolment as an Advocate in Ms.No.958 of 2018 dated 27.06.2018 in speedy manner and punish him in accordance with law and remove the 2nd respondent from the enrolment on the file of the 1st respondent and pass any other suitable orders.
Mr.G.Gopinath, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent would submit that the complaint submitted by the writ petitioner was taken on file, the enquiry was conducted and final order has been passed by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry in T.N.E.C.R.No.32/2021 dated 13.12.2022.
2. Thus, the cause did not exist and Consequently, the Writ petition stands disposed of as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
A writ of mandamus is not maintainable when the matter has already been adjudicated by the appropriate authority.
The pendency of a criminal case against an applicant serves as a bar to enrollment as an advocate before the Bar Council.
Full disclosure of criminal involvement is essential for enrollment as an Advocate, and failure to disclose such information can lead to dismissal of the application.
The eligibility for enrollment as an advocate under the Advocates Act is contingent upon compliance with specific disqualifications, particularly concerning concurrent employment in government servic....
A writ of Mandamus is not necessary when the complainant has the option to pursue the matter before a different authority, as per the provisions of the Advocates Act.
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.
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 misuse of the advocate emblem by an individual not duly enrolled as an advocate constitutes a violation of legal provisions, warranting investigation and action by relevant authorities.
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 necessity to exhaust available statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention in matters concerning the Bar Council's decisions.
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
