NEEL KANTH TIWARI Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties. At the stage of admission, this Writ Petition is decided finally without calling counter and rejoinder affidavit.

(2.) The petitioner claims to be a practicing Advocate in the District Court, Varanasi after he was enrolled as Advocate by Bar Council U.P. and allotted Enrolment No. U.P.4421 of 1996 and also thus a member of Central Bar Association, Varanasi. The petitioner, by means of present Writ Petition under Article 226, Constitution of India seeks to challenge the legal authenticity/ validity of the U.P. Bar Council Advocates Association Affiliation Rules, 2001 framed by Bar Council, U.P., in purported exercise of its power under Section 6 of the Advocates Act and further to issue a writ of mandamus directing the Bar Council of U.P. not to compel Respondent No.4/ Central Bar Association, Varanasi (U.P.) to adopt Model Bye Laws, dated 12-2-2005 and to direct Respondent No.4/ Central Bar Association (Varanasi) to hold election as per its old Constitution. It is submitted that the Central Bar Association, Varanasi is a society registered under Society Registration Act (as Amended by State of U.P.).

(3.) In brief, the primary objection of the petitioner is that Section 6 of the Advocates Act does not confer power to frame Model Bye Laws and/or compel 'Bar Association of Advocates' to adopt it.