AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS. versus BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS.

Citation: [2018] 1 S.C.R. 594 · Decided: 05-02-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.K. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
594
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS.
v.
BAR COUNCIL OF DELHI & ORS.
(Transferred Case (Civil) No. 126 of 2015)
FEBRUARY 05, 2018
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.]
Advocates – State Bar Councils – Elections:
Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry – Applications
filed by the applicants contending that Advocate General for the
State of Tamil Nadu, has expressed apprehension on his ability to
conduct free and fair elections to the State Bar Council of Tamil
Nadu and Puducherry – However, Bar Council of India (BCI) stated
that the Tribunal/Committees have been constituted to oversee the
elections to be held by the respective State Bar Councils – Held:
Committee consisting of retired Chief Justice/Judges of various High
Courts has been constituted by BCI and entrusted to look into the
affairs of the elections to the said State Bar Councils – No ground
to constitute any another Committee in the place of Committee so
constituted.
Bar Council of Kerala – Applications by advocates practicing
in Kerala seeking impleadment as also modification of the election
schedule finalized by BCI on the ground that the day of election
though being Sunday, is a festival day celebrated in the State and
thus, it would not be possible for the majority of the voters to cast
their vote – Held: On special facts and circumstances of the case,
the date of election for Bar Council of Kerala is pre-poned –
However, rest of the election schedule, as finalized by BCI, will
remain the same.
Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa – Applications seeking
direction to BCI and the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa to
permit the advocates of these States, who are on the electoral rolls,
to cast their vote at New Delhi as they have settled in Delhi for the
purpose of legal practice – Held: Election schedule having already
been finalized, there is no ground to permit the applicants or the
advocates practicing at New Delhi to cast their votes at New Delhi
instead of their respective States.
594
[2018] 1 S.C.R. 594
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
595
Bar Council of Rajasthan – Application filed by Bar Council
of Rajasthan seeking rescheduling of the date of election from
28.03.2018 to 05.04.2018 on the ground that the Rajasthan High
Court has holidays from 24.03.2018 to 01.04.2018 and all the
members practicing in the High Court would not be able to exercise
their franchise owing to such holidays – Held: No ground found to
defer the date of election on the pretext of holidays as it would not
be proper to reschedule the election already fixed.
Bar Council of Delhi – Applicant’s name not included in the
electoral roll – Application seeking direction to Bar Council of Delhi
to include his name in the electoral list – Held: Applicant did not
provide the copies of the original documents as a result of which
his name was not included in the electoral roll – No ground made
out for directing the Bar Council of Delhi to include the name of
the applicant in the electoral roll.
Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh – Application seeking
direction to the Andhra Pradesh Bar Council and Telangana State
Bar Council to conduct election as per the schedule declared by
Supreme Court – Held: BCI has fixed elections schedule for the
State of Andhra Pradesh – However, there is no mention of the
election schedule for the State of Telangana – The Bar Council of
Telangana has not yet come into existence and therefore, the election
in the State Bar Council of Telangana has not been fixed – No
reason found to direct the BCI to hold election for the State Bar
Council of Telangana.
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Transferred Case (Civil)
No. 126 of 2015.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
Vikramjeet Banerjee, Rajiv Dutta, Manan Kumar Misra, Mahabir
Singh, V. S. Giri, Sr. Advs, Ramesh Babu M. R., Anantha Narayana
M.G., Gaurav Agarwal, S. Moh. Haneef, Piyush Choudhary, Satya Mitra,
J.  S. Rawat, Ghanshyam Joshi, Ms. Pratibha Jain, Tanuj Agarwal (For
M/S. Parekh & Co.), Ajainder Sangwan, Vivek Narayan Sharma,
Siddharth Mahajan, Raj Kumar Sharma, S. N. Sharma, S. K. Sharma,
Deepak Sehrawat, Tarunesh Kumar, Arun Rathi, C. P. Singh, Sanjay
Singh, Shubham Awasthi, Ms. Sweety Chattopadhyay, Rohan Sharma,
Ms. Rishina Parashar, Irfan Firdous, Kunal Chopra, Anirudh Kumar, V.
P. Singh, Narendra Singh, Dhan Singh, Pradeep Kumar Sharma, Sriram
AJAYINDER SANGWAN AND ORS. v. BAR COUNCIL OF
DELHI & ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
596
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 1 S.C.R.
P., Ms. K
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.