Karnataka High Court Stays Election To Tumakuru District Advocates Association As Women Members Seek Implementation Of 33% Reservation

The Karnataka High Court on Wednesday stayed till March 21 elections to the Tumakuru District Advocates Association, which is scheduled on April 5.

Justice M Nagaprasanna passed the interim order while hearing a petition filed by women advocates of the Bar association, challenging an endorsement rejecting their representation seeking 33% reservation in the total existing posts at the Association, in favour of women members.

The plea prays for a direction to the Association to implement 33% reservation for women in the upcoming elections and set aside the decision of the Association which denied the relief.

Advocate Vidyashree KS appearing for the petitioners argued that the issue is covered by the Supreme Court in Deeksha N Amruthesh v. State of Karnataka.

Further praying for interim relief she informed the high court that as per the calendar of events published, call for nominations is to begin from Thursday (tomorrow).

The bench directed the petitioner to serve on the respondents and posted the matter for further hearing on March 21.

As per the petition, the petitioners had addressed a letter on March 5 to the Election Officer and President of the Tumakuru Bar Association requesting for reservation of 33% of the total existing posts in favor of women.

However, the Tumakuru District Advocates Association through its March 17 decision rejected the petitioners request stating that as per the Tumakuru District Association Bylaws 1960, bylaw no. VIII, one post in the executive committee members is already reserved for women. It was further stated that a decision on the requested reservation could be made only by a committee meeting and that the present ongoing committee does not have the authority to make such decisions. It was also stated that there was no sufficient time to call for a full committee meeting.

The plea states that the Association has failed to exercise its discretion in a manner that upholds constitutional morality and progressive jurisprudence. The rejection of the petitioners' request on the grounds that the ongoing committee lacks the authority to decide the matter and that there is insufficient time to convene a meeting is an unreasonable excuse, it says.

The petitioners claim that the Association, being a democratic body, ought to facilitate deliberations on crucial issues affecting a significant segment of its members. "Thus the impugned decision of the Tumakuru District Advocates Association, is arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 15, and 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India," the plea submits. 

It adds, “The rejection of the Petitioners' request for 33% reservation for women in the upcoming elections, despite a considerable number of female members in the Association, amounts to gender discrimination and violates the principles of equality and non-discrimination.”

Case Title: Mohanalumar K R & Others AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 8186/2025

Appearance: Advocate Vidyashree K S for Petitioner.