Bar Association Essentially A Private Body, Writ Won't Lie For Dispute Over Its Office Bearer: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that disputes regarding the office bearer of a Bar Association can't be decided in a writ petitioner as the Bar Associations are essential private bodies.

"The Bar Association remains essentially a private body and in respect of dispute of its office bearer a writ petition ordinarily would not lie", the Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed.

Essentially, the Court was hearing a writ plea filed by one Sardar Jitendra Singh, an advocate, who had contested election for the post of President of Tehsil Bar Association, Khatauli, District Muzaffar Nagar and stood second.

Filing the instant plea, he submitted before the Court that respondent no.4 was elected for the said post, but on account of some proceedings undertaken by the Bar Council, he had not been administered the oath.

Therefore, the petitioner moved the Court arguing that since the person who was elected for the post hasn't been administered the oath, he should be declared President of Tehsil Bar Association, Khatauli.

Appearing for the Bar Council Of Uttar Pradesh, Counsel Amit Kumar Singh stated that neither the writ petition is maintainable nor such a course would be permissible in view of the admitted scenario that the petitioner had not secured the highest votes.

In this regard, he further argued that there is no provision in the bye-laws that provides that the second candidate to be declared President in the event the candidate with the highest votes is declared ineligible.

Having heard the contention of the counsel for respondent Bar Council, the Court observed that this contention was right as the dispute regarding the office bearer of a Bar Association can't be decided in a writ petitioner as the Bar Assoaictaions are essential private bodies.

Moreover, the Court added, in the absence of any provision in the bye-laws the candidate with second highest votes cannot be declared as President. Lastly, leaving it open for the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in respect of his grievance, the writ petition was consigned to records.

In related news, the Karnataka High Court last year held that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable against a Bar Association.

The Supreme Court had held in Supreme Court Bar Association vs B D Kaushik (2011) 13 SCC 774 that bar associations discharge a public function. In 2016, the Delhi High Court had held that a Writ Petition is maintainable against Bar Councils and Bar Associations.

Case title - Sardar Jitendra Singh v. Bar Council Of Uttar Pradesh And 3 Others

Click Here To Download Order

Read Order