JUDGMENT

1. This is an application by one Ram Sarup praying that notice be taken of the conduct of Babu Tika Ram, a Vakil of this Court, now practising at Agra, it being alleged that he is guilty of professional misconduct. The misconduct imputed to the Vakil is a violation of Rule 26, Part II, of the High Court Rules. The first paragraph of that rule provides that if an applicant for admission as a practitioner holds any appointment or carries on any trade or other business the High Court may refuse to admit him, or pass such orders on his application as it thinks proper. That paragraph has no bearing on the present case, inasmuch as in the petition before us it is not asserted that at the time when the Vakil applied in 1894 for admission, he was carrying on any trade or business. It is the provision of the second paragraph of the rule which the Vakil is alleged to have contravened. That paragraph requires that any person who, having been admitted as a legal practitioner, shall accept any appointment or shall enter into any trade or other business, shall give notice thereof to the High Court. It is said that this Vakil has, since his enrolment, been carrying on business in grain an