AMRISH KUMAR AGRAWAL Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A.S. Rawat, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned Advocate for the appellant, Mr. Piyush Garg, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 and Mr. Shakti Singh, learned Advocate for respondent No.2.

(2.) This is yet another case where a District Bar Association appears to believe that the membership of an advocate can be terminated at its mere whim without even complying with the basic rules of natural justice. The petitioner is an advocate practicing in the courts at Kashipur, and is a member of the Kashipur Bar Association. It is his case that the Kashipur Bar Association had passed a resolution on 20.09.2018 expressing condolence on the death of the mother of Smt. Savitri Devi, Advocate; they had resolved, as a mark of respect, that advocates would abstain from attending all the courts at Kashipur on that day; and the Kashipur Bar Association had terminated the membership of the petitioner, by its resolution dated 03.10.2019, for having attended court on 20.09.2018 despite the resolution of the Kashipur Bar Association dated 20.09.2018 not to attend courts on that day.

(3.) This practice of advocates in Udham Singh Nagar District, boycotting courts on the death of relatives of their advocate colleagues, has been deprecated by a Division Bench of this Court in Ishwar Shandilya Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others (order in Writ Petition (PIL) No.31 of 2016, dated 25.09.2019).