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

2013 Supreme(All) 1201

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : SUNIL AMBWANI AND BHARAT BHUSHAN, JJ.
ELDER COMMITTEE CENTRAL BAR ASSOCIATION, AZAMGARH ....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS ...Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 61100 of 2011, decided on 26th April, 2013)

Advocates Appeared:
A.P. Singh and Rakesh Pande for the Petitioner; C.S.C., M.D. Singh Shekhar, Rajiv Kumar Misra, Vinay Kumar Rai and Yashwant Varma for the Respondents.

Headnote:Advocates Act, 1961—Sections 6 and 17—The Advocates Welfare Funds Act, 2001—Section 16—Bar Council of U.P.—Powers to interfere in election of Bar Association—Determination of—Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh had no power or authority to interfere in the election of the Bar Associations in any manner whatsoever—Hence, the election of the Bar Association might be held and concluded in accordance with law. [Paras 27, 30 and 31]

       

JUDGMENT

By the Court.—The Central Bar Association, Azamgarh is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act with Registration No. 1194 dated 31.1.1997. The society has its own bye-laws, registered with the Registrar of Societies.

2. By this writ petition the Elders Committee, Central Bar Association, Azamgarh through its Chairman Ved Prakash Rai, Advocate have prayed for quashing the order dated 14.10.2011 passed by the Vice-Chairman, [ Bar Council of U.P.]1 entertaining a complaint of Shri Pyare Mohan Srivastava, Advocate-a Member of Central Bar Association, Azamgarh against the inclusion of allegedly ineligible persons as members of Elders Committee on allegations of misconduct against them on the ground that according to the model bylaws as framed by the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, they are not entitled to supervise and to take part in the elections and that their conduct is violative of Section 35 of the Advocate Act. The petitioners have also prayed for writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful holding of elections of Central Bar Association, Azamgarh fixed for 21.10.2011.

3. The Vice-Chairman, Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh has by his order dated [14.10.2011]1 has restrained the Elders Committee, Central Bar Association to take any steps towards holding elections of the office bearers of the Bar Association.

4. Shri Ram Niwas Singh appearing for the petitioner submits that the Central Bar Association, Azamgarh has adopted the model bylaws framed and recommended by the Bar Council of U.P. Allahabad, which are registered with the Asstt. Registrar, Chit, Fund and Societies, Azamgarh on 31.12.2009. The model bylaws provides for appointment of five senior-most members of the Bar Association to the Elders Committee for the purposes of taking over after the term of office bearers is over and for holding elections.

5. By a resolution of the Central Bar Association, Azamgarh dated 18.8.2011 and Elders Committee was constituted consisting of Shri Ved Prakash Rai as its Chairman and Shri Vijay Pratap Singh, Shri Krishna Bihari Asthana; Shri Mohd. Iliyas Khan, Shri Surya Nath Singh as members.

6. It is submitted that for the year 2010-11 since the term of the office bearers of the Executive Committee of the Central Bar Association, Azamgarh had come to an end on 23.8.2011, with the extended period of one month, the general house of the Association resolved on 30.9.2011 to hold fresh elections. The Elders Committee started functioning from 18.8.2011, declared the election schedule on 4.10.2011 for elections on the post of President, Senior Vice President, two Vice Presidents, one Secretary, three Joint Secretaries, one Treasurer and two members of the Executive Committee fixing the date of filing the nomination from 7th October, 2011 to 10th October, 2011; scrutiny on 12.10.2011; withdrawal on 14.10.2011; polling if necessary on 21.10.2011 from 11.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. and counting on 21.10.2011 from 4.00 p.m. upto end.

7. Shri Pyare Mohan Srivastava, the complainant arrayed as respondent No. 4 had also filed his nomination papers for the post of the President, which was found on scrutiny to be valid. He moved a complaint on 10.10.2011 questioning the nomination of Shri Addya Prasad Singh on the ground that he had not completed 25 years of practice to be eligible in accordance to the model bylaws and further that a criminal case is pending against him. He forwarded a copy of the complaint to Bar Council of U.P. In his complaint he alleged that according to the resolution and the directions of the Elders Committee it was mandatory for every candidate to make declaration of any conviction or pending criminal case. Shri Addya Prasad Singh filed a notorised affidavit declaring pendency of criminal case, which was stayed by the High Court in Criminal Case No. 7399 of 2008.

8. The Elders Committee by its order dated 12.10.2011 rejected the complaint of Shri Pyare Mohan Srivastava on the ground




























































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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 Back to top