Supreme Court Issues Notice On HC Bar Association Jabalpur's Plea Against State Bar Council's Refusal To Give Separate Recognition

The Supreme Court today issued notice on a plea filed by High Court Advocates Bar Association, Jabalpur against refusal of the State Bar Council to recognize it as a separate bar association.

The bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra tagged the case with other similar pending case(s) and assured that it would be listed early.

During the hearing, counsel for petitioner informed the court that the issue raised was prevailing on pan-India basis and the Bar looked upto the Supreme Court for appropriate redressal. Referring to Bar Associations of Allahabad, Bombay and Calcutta High Courts, the CJI remarked that it was indeed a very important issue.

To recapitulate facts of the case, the petitioner had initially filed a writ petition contesting an order from the Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh (Recognition Committee). This order pertained to a Recognition Case involving the High Court Advocates Bar Association, Jabalpur (the applicant), the Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association, Jabalpur (objector), and the Democratic Lawyers Forum, Jabalpur. It denied separate recognition to the High Court Advocates Bar Association, Jabalpur.

In rejecting the petitioner's application for recognition, the Recognition Committee had expressed concern over the circumstances leading some Senior Advocates to dissociate themselves from the Objector Association and seek separate facilities. Additionally, the Committee directed the State Bar Council to address acts of intolerance and formulate appropriate rules to address such situations.

When the High Court upheld the State Bar Council's order, the petitioner moved the top Court assailing its judgment dated May 3, 2024. The High Court ruled that the purpose of the Adhivakta Kalyan Nidhi Adhiniyam Act of 1982, which administers welfare schemes for advocates, was being fulfilled through existing recognized bar associations.

"...there appears to be no justification for registration of a parallel body when the aim and object of Act of 1982 and the aim and object of the Advocates Act 1961 are being already fulfilled. Thus, prima facie there is no justification for recognizing a parallel body without there being any averment that their members are being not administered the socially beneficial provisions of either the Advocates Act of 1961 or the Act of 1982,” it said.

Dismissing the petition, the High Court further recorded, "when it is not contended that by denying the recognition, the act of the State Bar Council has caused any affect to the fundamental freedom of petitioner Association, it cannot be said that petitioners have any right to seek separate recognition without there being any object for the same, specially when it has failed to make out a case that its members are being denied benefits of the welfare scheme, which they are even otherwise getting by virtue of their dual membership, High Court Bar Association or district Bar Association which are recognized Bar Associations”.

Case Title: HIGH COURT ADVOCATES BAR ASSOCIATION VS. SECRETARY STATE BAR COUNCIL, SLP(C) No. 011743/ 2024