Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Madhya Pradesh HC bench Bench comprising Chief Justice Hemant Gupta and Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla has recently ruled that a state bar council cannot meddle with the elections of the bar association. The bench held that nowhere under the advocates act, 1961 or the advocates welfare fund act, 1982, it has been provided that the bar council can interfere with the elections of the bar association.
One of the petitions was filed by the district bar association of Bhind and another petition arose from the Guna District bar association. The former petition wanted the striking down of the decision of the appellate committee of the state bar council in setting aside the election of a person to the bar association in suo moto trial.
In the latter case, the bar council interfered with the decision of the bar association in suspension of the membership of an advocate by asking for the details regarding his income and expenses. In response to the petitoners’ contention that the state bar council has no authority to interfere, the bar council argued that it is a statutory body having certain obligations to maintain ‘uniformity’ and ‘fair elections’ for the ‘welfare of the advocates’ by Placing reliance on the case of Supreme Court Bar Association and others v BD Kaushik, in which the bar council was allowed to supervise the elections of the bar association.
The High Court held that the case relied upon arose out of a dispute in the civil suit and the apex matter strongly supported the principle of ‘one bar one vote’ but never allowed the interference of bar council into the elections of the union. The Bench in turn relied on the case of RN Tiwari v State Bar Council of MP which supported the court’s position.
The Court closed the case by holding that it did not find any provision supporting the case for interference by the bar council.
86540
103860
630
114
59824