- Home
- /
- News Updates
- /
- Karnataka HC Refuses To Entertain...
Karnataka HC Refuses To Entertain PIL Challenging Bar Council Of India's Direction To Bar Associations To Supply Details Of Practising Advocates [Read Order]
Mustafa Plumber
8 Sep 2020 12:36 PM GMT
![Karnataka HC Refuses To Entertain PIL Challenging Bar Council Of Indias Direction To Bar Associations To Supply Details Of Practising Advocates [Read Order]](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/images/750x450_advocates-dress-code.jpg "Karnataka HC Refuses To Entertain PIL Challenging Bar Council Of Indias Direction To Bar Associations To Supply Details Of Practising Advocates [Read Order]")
Observing that "the aggrieved parties (Advocates) in this case are not helpless and they are not prevented by any disability from espousing their cause," the Karnataka High Court has disposed off a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by one Dr KB Vijayakumar as party-in-person, seeking to declare contents of a letter issued on July 24, by the Bar Council of India,...
Observing that "the aggrieved parties (Advocates) in this case are not helpless and they are not prevented by any disability from espousing their cause," the Karnataka High Court has disposed off a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by one Dr KB Vijayakumar as party-in-person, seeking to declare contents of a letter issued on July 24, by the Bar Council of India, (BCI), as illegal and void.
On July 24, the BCI had addressed a letter mandatorily asking all the District and Taluka Bar Associations across the country to supply the details of all practising Advocates who are members of their respective Bar Associations, for perusal of the e-Committee of the Supreme Court of India.
It was also mentioned that "This exercise has been made mandatory and such Advocates who fail to furnish the requisite information to their respective Bar Association, which in turn will forward the data to the BCI, shall be treated as "Non-Practicing Advocate by the Council".
Challenging the BCI direction, the PIL stated that it is the prerogative of the individuals to register themselves with any of the State / District Bar Associations or not and it is not mandatory as per the provisions of The Advocates Act, 1961. It was the petitioner's contention that an advocate cannot be compelled to be a member of a Bar Association.
"The stipulation in the letter supra of BCI that those advocates who are not members of any of the Bar Associations shall consequently be declared to be "non-practicing Advocates" is arbitrary, illegal, null and void and is a violation of the Advocates Act, 1961 according to which enrolment with a State Bar Council is the only requirement to practice as an Advocate in any Court in the country", the petition stated.
A division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice E S Indiresh while declining to entertain the petition said:
"If at all anyone is aggrieved by the said Circular/Communication, he or she has to be a member of the Bar, who are certainly themselves capable of canvassing their grievances by filing appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Hence, we decline to entertain this petition as a Public Interest Litigation and accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of", the order stated.
[Read Order]
