Supreme Court Issues Notice To Punjab & Haryana Bar Council On Plea Alleging Irregularities In Ludhiana Bar Election
story
The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana in a plea alleging that elections are held in the District Bar Association, Ludhiana without complying with the provisions of the 2015 Bar Associations (Constitution and Registration) Rules, with the voters' list comprising non-advocates and others without any voting rights.The bench of Justices S. K. Kaul and...
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 Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana in a plea alleging that elections are held in the District Bar Association, Ludhiana without complying with the provisions of the 2015 Bar Associations (Constitution and Registration) Rules, with the voters' list comprising non-advocates and others without any voting rights.
The bench of Justices S. K. Kaul and M. M. Sundresh was hearing an SLP against an April decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court on a writ petition filed by the SLP petitioner alleging non- compliance of the provisions of Rule 6(B)(i) of the Bar Associations (Constitution and Registrations) Rules, 2015.
"It is alleged that the elections are held in the District Bar Association, Ludhiana without complying with the provisions of the Rules (ibid) and without obtaining the necessary affidavit/declaration from the members of the Bar as required by the Rules. It is further alleged that in the last elections, the voter list was finalised without obtaining any such affidavit/declaration which is also contrary to the provisions of the Rules. And in such circumstances, when this issue was raised, the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana ordered that the Returning Officers (ROs) should obtain an affidavit/declaration from the voters prior to permitting them to vote which is in derogation of the provisions of the Rules. Learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 1, submits that the aforesaid issue had cropped up at the eleventh hour of the elections being conducted by the District Bar Association, Ludhiana. And, in any case, the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana shall look into the matter and take necessary steps for streamlining the procedure contained in the Rules and, if necessary, call a meeting of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana for this purpose and take a decision well in advance, preferably within a period of two months, so that such like situations do not arise in future or if at all arises, there is an effective mechanism to address them. In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the statement of learned counsel for respondent No. 1 – Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, the writ petition stands disposed of in terms thereof", the High Court said in the impugned order.
Rule 6(B)(i) says that every advocate can become member of one or more bar associations but he will have a right to cast his/her vote only at one bar Association and for that he/she shall file an affidavit to this effect at every election that he/she intends to cast his/her vote in a particular bar Association elections. It will be the duty of the bar Association to get the annual subscription cleared before finalising the list of voters on or before 31st of August of every year and thereafter the bar Association will send the list of eligible voters along with the duly sworn affidavits and photocopy of subscription clearance proof on or before 15th of September of every year.
The bench of Justices Kaul and Sundresh recorded that the advocate for the petitioner contends that in view of the passage of more than six months since the elections were held and the tenure of the elected persons being one year, he is confining his submissions to ensuring that in future a proper voters' list is drawn and elections in accordance with the proper drawn out list of voters are held. The bench noted that it is his submission that instead of the High Court disposing off the petition, this aspect should have been ensured.
"Issue notice to the respondents returnable in six weeks. A copy of the order to accompany the notice", ordered the bench.
The SLP petitioner avers that he is a practising advocate since 2006 having enrolled at District bar Association, Ludhiana and has "unearthed the large scale bungling going on in the district court bar association elections last year and the same is happening this year also". It is submitted that in pursuance of the directions issued by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in a 2014 matter, the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana duly framed the Bar Associations (constitution and registration) rules 2015. The 2015 rules were framed to bring uniformity, transparency with regard to the election procedure qua the office bearers of all the bar Association falling within the jurisdiction of Punjab and Haryana. The said rules were also upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
The petitioner contends that the voter list of the DBA, Ludhiana is totally invalid because it contains 51+83 members who have no voting rights in the elections of the District bar Association, Ludhiana. It is advanced that section 2(b) of the Rules says that an advocate means a person whose name appears on the roll of advocates prepared and maintained by the bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, and that the voter list prepared by the District Bar Association Ludhiana and sent to Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana for approval and which is approved by the Bar Council against the 2015 rules contains 51 non-advocates as per section 2(b) of the bar Association (constitution and registration) rules 2015.
It is further argued that the voter list prepared by the DBA, Ludhiana and approved by the bar Council of Punjab and Haryana contains 85 number of votes which are also present in the voter list of the Tax Bar Association Ludhiana despite the position being that the advocates of the taxation bar shall only be entitled to pay subscription fee of DBA Ludhiana but no voting rights.
"That the said voters list is prepared without following section 2(b) and rule 6 (B) (i) of the Bar Associations (Constitution and Registration) Rules, 2015. The voter list is prepared without scrutinising and objections taken from the members of bar qua the eligibility of valid voters mentioned in the said list, the respondent number two also approved illegally without checking the anomalies. When the voter list is not fair and legal the valid impartial, fair, democratic elections cannot be conducted anywhere", it is urged in the SLP.
Case Title: SUKHWINDER SINGH BHATIA v. BAR COUNCIL OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA & ORS.
Click Here To Read/Download Order