S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
B. Chandran – Appellant
Versus
Secretary/Disciplinary Committee-I, The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry – Respondent
ORDER :
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of 1st respondent, quash its proceeding in complaint No.142 of 2020 and pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
The writ petition has been instituted to quash the proceedings in Complaint No.142 of 2020. The 3rd respondent filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu for initiation of disciplinary action against the petitioner, who is a practising lawyer. The complaint has been numbered as Complaint No.142 of 2020. The petitioner raised several grounds on merits. The High Court in exercise of the powers of judicial review cannot adjudicate such disputed facts, which all are to be adjudicated by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu based on the documents and evidences and by following due process. Quashing of the complaint cannot be made in a routine manner, unless the actions are initiated by an incompetent authority having no jurisdiction. In the present case, the complaint has been entertained and numbered as Complaint No.142 of 2020. It is brought to the notice of this Court tha
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 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.
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 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 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.
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 available statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention in matters concerning the Bar Council's decisions.
The necessity to exhaust statutory appellate remedies before seeking judicial review in disciplinary matters under the Advocates Act, 1961.
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.
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.