PK DASH ADVOCATE & ORS. versus BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS. - Synopsis
A N GLOBAL LAW FIRM 9 Apr 2018
The Petitioners are invoking the Extraordinary Civil Writ Jurisdiction under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India of this Hon’ble Court seeking issuance of writ of Mandamus, Certiorari or any other writ and directions to the Respondents for:
directing the respondents to set the rules, policies and guidelines for the allotment of one chamber in the name of one advocate in courts premises of Delhi. And
directing setting up the rules, policies and guidelines for conducting fair and impartial elections of Bar Associations in Delhi after a period of two years, keeping the tenure of the Bar Association for two years.
And
directing setting rules, policies and guidelines restricting voting right of each advocate in one Bar Association of District Courts of Delhi.
And
directing setting rules, policies, guidelines and procedure for conducting elections of Bar Associations in Delhi and restricting illegal means to be used to influence voters during the elections of Bar Associations.
Whereas as per Section 6(1)(d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, it is provided that the State Bar Councils to safeguard the rights, privileges and interest of advocates on its roll and as per section 6(1)(i), it is also provided to do all other necessary functions for discharging above noted functions provided therein.
That the present petition is the immense need of the time to set the defined rules, policies and guidelines involving the issues of allotment of chambers, tenure of Bar Associations and the procedure for conducting free and fair elections of the Bar Associations.That it is eident that whenever the issue arises for the allotment of seat, chambers, several disputes aros between the advocates giving rise to multiplicity of litigation and wastage of precious time of this hon’ble court. 
That the allotment of chambers in Karkardoom was also delayed due to these reasons in the absence of set rules, policies and guidelines applicable to all Bar Associations. Somehow, those chambers were allotted with the intervention of this hon’ble court after entertaining several writ petitions.That the another glaring issue is allotment of the Lawyer’s Chambers in the Dwarka Court Complex, in the absence of set rules, policies and guidelines, despite the availability of chambers since the inception of court functioning, Chambers could not be allotted to the advocates in due time and still many litigations have been filed pending before various courts.
That difficulties in the allotment of chambers to the advocates are not limited to Karkardoom and Dwarka courts, but soon it would be seen, in the absence of any set rules, policies and guidelines to be set by this hon’ble court, in the upcoming allotment of Chambers in Rohini Court Complex and Saket Court Complex.
It is has been seen that in the absence of uniform rules, guidelines and policies framed by the respondents, some of the advocates have been able secure the allotment of two chambers, whereas others are even fighting for the allotment of single chamber. In this regard, a detailed report may be directed to be filed by the respondents to show allotment of chambers to each advocate by them in their court premises to find out the dual allotment of chambers in the name of one advocate who are holding and possessing two chambers despite giving undertaking in respect of holding one chamber in one court complexes of Delhi. Recently, Delhi Bar Association has also written to the Chief Justice, Delhi High Court, Delhi, about the false affidavits given by the advocates for securing dual allotment of chambers. 
That it is pertinent to mention that Dwarka Court Bar Association in co-ordination with the District Judge invited the applications for allotment of 340 Chambers to the Lawyers and the applications were duly received subject to several objections. Thereafter, Dwarka Court Bar Association vide resolution dated 5.5.2010 held that the members of Dwarka Court Bar Association shall have only one membership of Dwarka Court Bar Association and they have to submit an undertaking that they have withdrawn their membership from all other Bar Associations. Thereafter, it was further held vide resolution dated 29.5.2010 that only those members who have given their declaration shall be entitled for the allotment of Chambers in Dwarka Court Bar Association. It is surprising that some of the members who have been selected in the list of the members who have been allotted chambers have not given their declaration to this effect to the best reasons known to them.         
That in the absence of uniform rules, policies and guidelines set by the respondents in the allotment of chambers to advocates practicing and enrolled with the different Bar Associations in Delhi, Bar Associations have not been able to sort out fair and impartial rules, policies and guidelines giving rise in inviting litigations at the time of allotment of chambers by them.
That some set rules, guidelines and policies may be directed to be set by this hon’ble court to the respondents  directing them to formulate a set of uniform rules, guidelines and policies for the allotment of chambers to the advocates enrolled and practicing in Delhi (i.) like allotment of one chamber in the name of one advocate, (ii.) setting some nearby area being criteria for allotment, (iii.) appearances in the said courts where chamber is applied by the advocate, (iv.) establishing a common record to avoid dual allotment in the name of one advocate, (v.) debarring an advocate to allot a new chamber who has been allotted chamber earlier and who has either sold or transferred his chamber to someone else, despite surrendering it to the respective Bar Association, (vi.) setting the criteria of seniority in the allotment of chambers, (vii.) constitution of a committee responsible to allot the chamber impartially. 
That the another alarming issue which is also to be taken care of with the intervention of this Hon’ble court is the tenure of the Bar Associations and the procedure adopted for conducting the elections. 
That it is evident that now the district courts have been divided in several branches, it has been seen that keeping no uniformity in the tenure of the Bar Associations, elections are conducted almost entire year in either of the Bar Association. In the absence of any set rules, guidelines and policies, members of all the Bar Associations take keen interest in the elections of all the Bar Association giving rise to another problem of unnecessary intervention of one Bar Association in the governing council of other Bar Association which needs to be checked by adopting one Bar one Vote method.  
That it has been seen that during elections time of the Bar Associations, in the absence of proper control, policies, guidelines and rules, all types of illegal means are used to influence the voters which is also required to be controlled. 
The petitioners along with other so many advocates made a representation dated 9.9.2010 which is annexed with the petition as ANNEXURE-A to the Respondent No. 1 and 2, but nothing has been done. Hence the present petition.
×

C2RM… To Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.
×

SAARTH… To Know More

Launching Soon : SAARTH, your complete client, case, practise & document management SAAS application with direct client chat feature.

If you want to know more give us a Call at :+91 98109 29455 or Mail info@soolegal.com