Delhi High Court Dismisses Plea To Disqualify BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra From Rajya Sabha, Imposes ₹25K Costs

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition seeking to disqualify Bar Council of India (BCI) Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra from the Rajya Sabha, with costs of Rs. 25,000.

Justice Sanjeev Narula rejected the plea moved by Advocate Amit Kumar Diwakar, who alleged that Mishra, while holding the office of Chairman of BCI, which is a statutory body, cannot simultaneously serve as a sitting member of the Rajya Sabha.

Mishra was elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Bihar. He was the candidate of NDA.

The Court said that Diwakar had bypassed the mechanism for challenging elections as outlined in the Representation of the People Act.

It added that Diwakar neither being an elector, nor a candidate in the election in question, lacked the necessary locus standi to initiate an election petition.

“The constitutional and statutory framework stipulates that challenges to elections must be made in the prescribed manner under the Act, and the courts cannot allow writ petitions to serve as an alternative route to circumvent this established procedure,” the court said.

It added: “Therefore, the Petitioner's decision to invoke this Court's writ jurisdiction without filing an election petition, amounts to a misapplication of legal principles. The claim, disguised as a writ petition, is fundamentally an attempt to challenge the election of Respondent No. 5 (Mishra) which cannot be examined in the present proceedings.”

Justice Narula further said that Diwakar's attempt to seek a writ of mandamus directing the Union Ministry of Law and Justice to initiate steps to disqualify Mishra was misplaced.

“The disqualification under Article 102(1) cannot occur automatically, solely based on certain allegations or presumptions. It necessitates a formal inquiry and a reasoned determination, as prescribed by the Constitution,” the court said.

It added that Diwakar's allegation that Mishra was allegedly holding an office of profit cannot form the basis for the Court to issue directions to the Ministry, in disregard to the constitutional process.

“Therefore, the Petitioner's request for a mandamus to the Ministry of Law and Justice as well as the Election Commission of India is untenable and cannot be entertained by this Court,” the court said.

It added: “The Court has emphasized that an individual who does not meet these criteria cannot maintain an election petition. In light of the aforesaid principles, it is evident that the Petitioner, neither being an elector, nor a candidate in the election in question, lacks the necessary locus standi to initiate an election petition.”

The court further said: “Consequently, this Court finds that the present petition not only lacks merit, but is also an abuse of the legal process, aimed at circumventing the proper remedy. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs. 25,000/-, to be deposited by the Petitioner with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within four weeks from today.”

Petitioner appeared in person.

Mr. Maninder Singh, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rangasaran Mohan, Mr. Amarpal Singh Dua, Mr.

Preet Pal Singh, Mrs. Tanupreet Kaur, Ms. Akanksha Singh, Mr. Unmukt Bhardwaj and Mr. Madhukar Pandey, Advocates for BCI.

Mr. Chetan Sharma, ASG with Mr. Ripu Daman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. Vedansh Anand, Mr. Amit Gupta, Mr. Vinay Yadav, Mr. Saurabh

Tripathi, Mr. Shubham Sharma, Mr. Kushagra Kumar and Mr. Abhinav Bhardwaj, Advocates for R-1/ UOI.

Mr. Ved Prakash Sharma, Advocate for R-5.

Mr. Sandeep Kumar Mahapatra and Mr. Tribhuvan, Advocates for R-4.

Mr. Rajeev Sharma and Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Advocates.

Title: AMIT KUMAR DIWAKAR v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1112

Click here to read order