D. SORNAM, BY POWER-OF-ATTORNEY D.A.S. SWAMI Vs. STATE OF MADRAS, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HEALTH DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Writ Petition, the dismissal of which at the admission stage has given rise to this appeal, failed at the outset without an examination of the merits of the case for want of representation before the Court at the hearing for admission either by the Petitioner in person or by an Advocate duly authorised. A person, D.A.S. Swami, as the power of attorney holder from the Petitioner, would plead her case at the hearing for admission, and sought to do so before us at the hearing for admission of the appeal. The short question is whether this is permissible.

(2.) THE actual petitioner, whose rights are agitated in the Writ Petition, is one D. Sornam, and the question involved is the rejection of her application to the Medical College as a Science Graduate on the ground that she is only a Home Science Graduate and so not qualified for admission under Rule 1 (e) of the Rules of the Government for admission to the Medical College. The Writ Petition is filed by her power of attorney holder D. A.S. Swami. Even the affidavit in support of the application, is sworn to by this D. A.S. Swami who, describes himself as a lawyer and the petitioner's power of attorney holder. He is the holder of a law degree and we take judicial notice of the fact that he has been removed from the rolls of the High Court on account of some professional irregularities. Manifestly he cannot claim to appear for a suitor as a Pleader or Advocate. But it is interesting to note that the general power of attorney which has been filed in this case, describes him as a lawyer and this is a matter which we would like the Bar Council to examine, as we find that this D. A.S. Swami has sought appearance in Courts in more than one case as power of attorney holder for the party. In this case, the Writ Petitioner is no doubt the niece of D. A.S. Swami and she, who is very much a major, aged about 23 years, describes him as her statutory guardian after the demise of her father in 1963. But we find that, in one case referred to by D. A.S. Swami himself in his grounds of Writ Appeal, as power of attorney holder from an accused in a criminal case, he displaced a practising Advocate who was appearing for the accused and sought to intervene in the proceedings.

(3.) THE power of attorney presented in this case runs in those terms: