PRAVEEN KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel appearing in person is given liberty tq delete paragraph no. 11 of the rejoinder affidavit filed in the case.

(2.) THE writ application has been filed by the Advocate of this Hon'ble Court challenging a notification dated 3-3-2008. By virtue of this notification, the Bar Council of India while exercising power under Section 8-A of the Advocates Act, 1961, has constituted a special Committee of three,persons because the election to the body which is Bihar State bar Council (B. S. B. C.) was not held within the statutory period. Petitioner has a grievance especially on the nomination of two persons in the Special Committee who were members of the outgoing council. There cannot be any dispute that the Advocate General shall have to be one of the persons nominated in this regard ex officio but, nomination of two other persons who too had a duty and moral responsibility to see the election is held within time cannot be made part and parcel of the Special Committee. It would amount to conferring a recognition despite failed responsibility of holding the next election within the time frame.

(3.) NO doubt the powers under Sec. 8-A has been given to the Bar Council of India (B. C. I.) to nominate any advocate who is, on the roles of the Bar Council of the State but, it is not understood as to how the Bar council of India understood the same as a provision to mean that the said nomination shall be restricted to persons or members who were part and parcel of the outgoing bar Council.