Empanelment Of Advocate Bank's Discretion; Writ Court Cannot Ordinarily Interfere: Karnataka High Court

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit while rejecting a petition filed by one Thimmanna said that, "Empanelment is a matter of discretion of the bank concerned; the exercise of such discretion involves a host of factors including the fiduciary relationship of 'client & counsel'; in matters of this kind a Writ Court cannot ordinarily interfere & undertake a deeper examination."

It was argued by the counsel for petitioner that the client could not have been abruptly discontinued on the Panel (Union Bank of India) and without a prior notice and thus sought for setting aside the communication dated September 27.

To which the court said, "The text of the impugned order cannot be construed as attaching stigma to the petitioner as a professional; the bank has exercised its prerogative in empaneling the lawyers of its choice and not empaneling the petitioner; such an exercise cannot be faulted, subject to all just exceptions into which argued case of the petitioner does not fit."

Accordingly it held the writ petition being devoid of merits is liable to be rejected in limine and accordingly it is.

Case Title: Thimmanna v. Union Bank Of India

Case No: Writ Petition No.22279 Of 2021

Date Of Order: 7th Day Of December, 2021

Appearance: Advocate Mohammed Shameer, for Petitioner

Click Here To Read/Download Order