DEVENDRA KUMAR Vs. GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these two writ petitions, the controversy involved being common although the nature of challenge is from different spectrums, namely, one involving the interpretation of Rule 31(A) of the Bar Council of Delhi Election Rules, 1968 (for short the Rules), while the other challenging the constitutional validity of Rule 31(A)(ii) of the said Rules, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a singular order. For the sake of convenience, we shall first advert to the facts in W.P.(C) No.1985/2011 where the assail is to the constitutional validity of the Rules and state the facts as they are common to both the cases and thereafter proceed to dwell upon the challenge to the action on the foundation of the interpretation placed upon by the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Presently to the commonality of the factual score and the grounds of attack in the backdrop of the constitutional validity of the Rule in question. The petitioner is a practising Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council of Delhi and had secured maximum number of first preference votes amongst the unsuccessful candidates in the election that was held on 1 st and 2 nd December, 2009 for electing the members of the Bar Council of Delhi. His name featured at serial no.27 of the final list just second to the 25 th candidate who was declared elected to the Bar Council of Delhi by the Election Committee.

(3.) As a casual vacancy occurred, the petitioner submitted a representation on 11 th August, 2010 to the Bar Council of Delhi for coopting him as a member. As there was no response, the petitioner knocked at the doors of this Court. The writ court in W.P.(C) No.5198/2010 [Devender Kumar vs. State (NCT) of Delhi] only directed that the Bar Council of Delhi should also consider the representation submitted by the petitioner at the time of co-option.