CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA Vs. NYAYA PANCHAYAT BARWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short question that arises in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is, whether section 271 (1) of the Madhya Pradesh Panchayats Act, 1962 is ultra vires the State legislature on the ground that it offends against Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner's is that section 271 (I) of the Madhya pradesh Panchayats Act, 1962 is constitutionally void inasmuch as it affects (i) the fundamental right of the petitioner No. 1 Chandra Shekhar Sharma an advocate practising at Barwaha, to carry on his profession guaranteed by Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution; and (ii) the right of the petitioner No. 2 amarsingh who is being tried before the Nyaya Panchayat Barwaha, to be represented by a legal practitioner of his choice.

(3.) THE problem before us had to be viewed from two angles; first from the view point of the legal practitioners ; and secondly from that of the litigants. Though the question for consideration, as to whether section 271 (I)of the Panchayats Act offends Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution, is of considerable importance to the litigant public it is general and the legal profession in particular, it is no longer res Integra, it being practically concluded by several decisions of the various High Court, from both the view points noted above.