Rajasthan HC Stays BCI Decision Halting Elections Of High Court Bar Association At Jaipur

Update: 2022-10-11 10:46 GMT
story

The Rajasthan High Court today stayed a direction passed by the Bar Council of India halting the elections of the High Court Bar Association at Jaipur, after the Council was moved to implement the principle of "One Bar One Vote" in the State. The single bench of Justice Mahendra Goyal has issued notices to BCI, Bar Council of Rajasthan and High Court Bar Association Jaipur. The...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Rajasthan High Court today stayed a direction passed by the Bar Council of India halting the elections of the High Court Bar Association at Jaipur, after the Council was moved to implement the principle of "One Bar One Vote" in the State.

The single bench of Justice Mahendra Goyal has issued notices to BCI, Bar Council of Rajasthan and High Court Bar Association Jaipur.

The Bar elections were scheduled to be held on November 18 this year.

However, one Advocate Sumer Singh Ola moved the BCI, contending that the Bar Association was conducting the elections hastily, notwithstanding the stipulation that such elections should be done only through genuine voters and advocates regularly practicing in the High Court.

Following which, the elections were stayed vide order dated October 3 and notices were issued to the Secretaries of State Bar Council of Rajasthan and High Court Bar Association.

Both the bodies were also directed to file their replies by 9th January 2023, the next date of hearing before BCI.

In the instant plea, Advocate Prahlad Sharma and other prospective candidates of various posts in the upcoming election contended that there was no material before the BCI to hold that the High Court Bar Association is not following the 'One Bar One Vote' system.

Dr Abhinav Sharma appearing for the Petitioners claimed that neither the electoral roll has been finalised nor the candidature of any such candidate has been finalized who is alleged to have carried vote in other Bar Associations or contested for any post in other Bar Association elections in the district.

Thus, it was contended that the action of BCI is absolutely without jurisdiction and beyond competence.

Case Title: Prahlad Sharma v. BCI

Click Here To Read/Download Order


Tags:    

Similar News