SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1954 Supreme(All) 96

DESAI, B.MUKERJI
KUMARI SAROJ RAWAT – Appellant
Versus
SECRETARY, BAR COUNCIL HIGH COURT – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Gopal Behari, Govind Das, Kanhaiya Lal Mishra

JUDGMENT

B. Mukerji, J.

[1] This is a petition by Kumari Saroj Rawat under Article 228 of the Constitution of India praying that a writ of mandamus be issued to opposite parties 1 and 2 "to act according to law and place the application of the applicant before the Court for appropriate orders" or in the alternative "to issue a writ of mandamus to opposite party No. 3 directing it to issue a notification under Section 1(3) of the Indian Bar Councils Act 1926 applying the provisions of the Act of 1926 to this Court." So far as the first prayer is concerned we need say nothing since the petition has been placed before us and we are going to make appropriate orders on that petition. In order to see whether or not we would issue a writ of mandamus to opposite-party No. 3, namely, the Government of Uttar Pradesh, it is necessary to state a few facts.

[2] The petitioner alleges that she passed the LL. B. Examination from the University of Lucknow in the year 1952 and that thereafter she completed one year's training "in chambers" in accordance with Rule 1 of the rules framed under Section 9 of the Indian Bar Councils Act of 1926. She further states that she applied to this Court for enrolme







Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top