S MUTHUMANICAKAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes up after notice of motion. Mr.N.R. Chandran, Additional Government Pleader, represents respondents 1 and 2 M/s. Row and Reddy represent respondents 3 and 4. The prayer in the Writ Petition runs as follows :-

(2.) There is one principle, countenanced by the highest court in the land, which dissuades me from going into the contentions raised by the petitioner. Dealing with the allegations of bais against a member of Bar Council Tribunal, the Supreme Court in Manak Lal v. Dr. Prem Chand, AIR 1957 SC 425, observed as follows :-

(3.) In Dr. G.Sarana v. University of Lucknow, (1977) 1 Lab LJ 68 the Supreme Court, dealing with a similar situation, and following the ratio in its earlier pronouncement, referred to above, observed as follows :-